Search This Blog

Sunday, August 19, 2012

Hiatus over? Global Climate Change

OK, so things have been interesting.  Financial issues, change of location, work, and... a distinct abundance of apathy in the whole thing required me to take a significant break from my various rants.  But perhaps, just perhaps, we'll give this a try again, just for kicks. 

I recently became a 'believer' in Global Climate Change.  That is, I came to believe the thesis that our climate is currently changing in a significant manner, and that this change, is, in fact, due to human activities increasing the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere.  However, this all fits neatly together with other things I have believed for quite a while, like, nuclear power should replace all other forms of power immediately to solve the 'energy crisis' as well as most of our other problems as the most efficient form of power on the planet.

Here's the jist of the "Global-Climate-Change-due-to-Human-Activity" argument, I guess

The planet earth has, as part of it's atmosphere, CO2
Various biological and geological processes on the planet create and utilize CO2
Until humans began burning vast amounts of fossil fuels during the industrial revolution, the CO2 circulated in a system much like the water system, in relative balance.  Actually, it may have even been reducing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Even though humans produce a very very small portion of the overall CO2 released into the atmosphere, the planet's natural carbon circulation system was not designed to incorporate that amount into the balance. 
As a result, there is now a net gain in overall CO2 in the atmosphere, overall.
Here's the website that convinced me that this is the case:
They did a pretty good job, really.

However convincing they are, though, they haven't really proposed any sort of feasable solution.  I definitely would like to see people educated correctly about CO2 production and global climate change, but I don't want to see that education go hand in hand with alternative energy indoctrination. 

What it comes down to, basically, is that no combination of solar power, tidal power, wind power, or any other non-carbon producing or non-nuclear-reaction utilizing source of power can even come close to satisfying global energy needs, even assuming NO growth.

Nuclear power can do it though, no problem.   With new  breeder reactor technology we can have an almost endless source of fuel for the reactors, and with new storing and decomissioning technology, waste is becoming less and less of a problem.  New primary reactor design even makes them safer, eliminating concerns that arose from the Japan 'crisis.'

It's important to remember that it's not just a one step fossil fuel for power problem, we also use oil for almost all of our plastics.  To convert to entirely bio-lipid based plastics we would have to convert giga-acres of farmland to growing hemp for the oil, and it still wouldn't come close to satisfying our plastics needs.  Right now there is no alternative to plastic, either..

SO use oil for plastic, but don't BURN the oil (and then we can even recycle the plastic efficiently maybe, cause we won't have to use fossil fuels to run the recycling plants), use nuclear reaction for energy, problems solved, all electric cars, no worries!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Some few of the things I find interesting: