Global Warming: What needs to be done?

[HeavilyArmed]

[ QUOTE ]
Loosen regs on nuclear power

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of using the state to beat people down, why not simply do the above in a big way. I know that ruins the liberal rush of micro-managing everyone's life but nuke power will, by itself, end most carbon dependence.

[mosdef]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Loosen regs on nuclear power

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of using the state to beat people down, why not simply do the above in a big way. I know that ruins the liberal rush of micro-managing everyone's life but nuke power will, by itself, end most carbon dependence.

[/ QUOTE ]

And create a new problem - nuclear waste is not easy to deal with. If we simply add a ton of nuclear reactors to the planet, we replace the problem of spewing carbon emissions into the air with the problem of spewing nuclear waste into the ground.

I agree that nuclear power is likely our only hope, but current technology does not adequately deal with the byproducts of nuclear consumption. This "solution" is not "ready" for implementation.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
...since this tends to derail the discussion,,

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said, side issues brought up are for another time and/or place.

-Zeno

[Jamougha]

There is a great talk on the topic by Nate Lewis here; http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/colloq/lewis1/

Personally I favour carbon capture and storage for the short term.

[livecards]

[ QUOTE ]
So the IPCC study just came out and things dont look pretty. It looks like the we can expect more heat waves and more hurricanes over the next century. But what I hear very little of is what we can do. I read that even if Kyoto was implemented tomorrow, it would have very little impact on the current trends. What exactly must be done? How much are we going to have to scale back our economies so that we can survive this? Has anyone even developed a realistic plan?

(Please dont turn this thread into a global warming debate. For the sake of discussion I am assuming that the report is true)

[/ QUOTE ]

An unknown technological advance will be the only solution. The world is not going to reduce energy consumption rates. As you pointed out, if Kyoto was implemented it will not materially change anything. Kyoto is just a way for the world's politicians to claim they are doing something about Global Warming. Unfortunately, Kyoto will just lead to a false sense of security for short term political gain. Short of a world Islamic state that wants to revert back to the 12th century, technological advance is the only solution.

[Zeno]

This same or very similar question was asked in this forum not too long ago. It may have dealt more with the personal response to global warming so my response was tailored to conservation with the inducement that it saved money. This capital was then invested in, say, GE or ExxonMobil.

On a more national of international level what "must be done" is an interesting question. Specific solutions may induce other problems, some foreseeable in which net gain must be weighed, others less so. It is a rather large conundrum with no real viable or workable solution given mankind’s present level of development. In other words I agree with Mickey - Realistically, not much will be done.

-Zeno

[ianlippert]

This is my biggest problem with global warming, its just being used for political ends without anyone actually coming up with a realistic solution. Up here in canada its basically being used as an easy attack by the opposition party, when the opposition party did nothing about global warming last time they were in power. And its not like global warming wasnt an issue 2 years ago. Or that stupid lights out campaign. How many of those people would be willing to completely give up their car and rely on public transportation to get everywhere. Its a lot of talk but I believe the majority of people arent willing to make the sacrifices.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
....but nuke power will, by itself, end most carbon dependence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Building viable Nuclear power plants will reduce carbon emmissions it will not end carbon emissions or reliance on fossil fuels for other things, transportion is one example but there are many others.

-Zeno

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
we replace the problem of spewing carbon emissions into the air with the problem of spewing nuclear waste into the ground.


[/ QUOTE ]


By-products of nuclear generating plants are not simply "spewed into the ground". Storage of this radioactive waste is not unmanageable and can be done wisely and technological advancement in this area is promising.

-Zeno

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Loosen regs on nuclear power

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of using the state to beat people down, why not simply do the above in a big way. I know that ruins the liberal rush of micro-managing everyone's life but nuke power will, by itself, end most carbon dependence.

[/ QUOTE ]

And create a new problem - nuclear waste is not easy to deal with. If we simply add a ton of nuclear reactors to the planet, we replace the problem of spewing carbon emissions into the air with the problem of spewing nuclear waste into space.

[/ QUOTE ]