1  2  3  Next

Here are some ideas as to how I think climate change can be combated based on greenhouse gas and government. i have not began to deal with carbon dioxide I guess it begins with indeviduals limiting energy use at home.

HFC's, PFP's and SF6

International Community

Ban on HFC’s PFP's and SF6 similar to the Montreal Protocol

US, Canadian, EU governments, Russian un-affiliated governments

Enforce ban on HFC's PFP's and SF6


Nitrous Oxide

US, Canadian, EU governments, Russian un-affiliated governments

- Consider prohibiting open air burning of agricultural residue
- Place restrictions on manufacturing of products such as ammonia for fertilizer and nylon
- Ban nitrous oxide as an aerosol propellant (E942)

State Provincial EU Nation,

- Prohibit open air burning of agricultural residue where practicable
- reduce emissions from electrical generation though technologies which separate nitrogen from air prior to combustion
- Work with agriculture to reduce emissions from farmland

Municipal

- provide people with closed incinerators which have lower nitrous oxide emissions then open air burning
- prohibit burning of materials such as leaves
- develop sewage systems which collect nitrous oxide

Industry

- Intensive feeding operations manufacture green manure ammonia fertilizers as opposed to direct spreading of manure
- Improvements to chemical industry in the manufacture of nylon


Methane (Natural Gas)

US, Canadian, EU governments, Russian, un-affiliated governments

- Work with petroleum industry to reduce emissions
State Provincial EU Nation,

- develop coal bed extraction to reduce methane emissions from coal mines
- encourage a change over from natural gas in the home to natural gas electric plants to reduce leaks
- Work with intensive livestock operations to develop methane collection systems for pig barns and manure management

Municipal

- Large cities begin immediate adoption of systems to burn natural gas from sewage waste
- Adoption of fuel cell systems by all communities with sewer systems as they become available
- Discourage throwing out of compost able garbage into landfills or home compost but rather by encouraging food choppers added to drains or food flushed down toilette.

Industry

- improve efforts to reduce natural gas leaks

   

I can see you have very good intentions, and you have done your research on the subject. I like your ideas, except removing ammonia from manure because the cows are still going to produce it no matter what(we pee ammonia all the time).

But, if you really want to stop emitting greenhouse gases, you are going to have to stop CO2 which requires a whole lot of changes. The options now are not pratical enough to work, but some are getting cheaper by the day.

   

Step one is to abandon this arogant notion that we can effect climate change deliberately or through negligence.

The climate is warming on schedule, according to cycles which extend back many, many millenia and we lack the ability to change much like King canute could order the tides.

PT Barnum had it right----and these KYOTO/IPCC scum have managed to fool most of the people---smartenup--wake up--the King is bare-assed.

   

I meant volentarily by large feedlots who can profitably manufacture nitric acid fertilizer. For more isolated feedlots and ranches it would not be practicle. Nor was I reffering to the sale of ammonia as a cleaner. Fertalizer companies such as Postash Corp have already gone away from ammonia, both for enviromental and narrcotic conccerns.

I think climate change is reversable or the at the least can be controled by futre generations so if we start at the stronger longer lived greenshouses gasses, our grandchildren could stop CO2 100 years from now.

   

Actually what it is is that ammoina does not emmit greenhouse gasses until it is broken down int he soil so it manure manajgment systems synthesise nitric acid there will be a signifacant drop in nitrous oxide, though it may not be ecconomical.

   

Thanks for the morning chuckle.
Now I have to go out to the barn and wheelbarrow some manure to where it is needed.

   

Useless. A whole lot of expense and work to effect at most a 7% reduction in Canada's GHG emissions:


(Click for source)

And you wouldn't even get anywhere near 7%. You could ban most of the 2% of other, but you won't get all of the N2O, and you sure as heck won't get all of the CH4.

If it is truly worthwhile to reduce GHGs, you simply HAVE to go after CO2 NOW. It'll give you the biggest bang for the buck.

   

GET A GRIP!!!!! The climate is doing it's thing, just as it has for a million years.

You have as much chance of modifying it, as you do stopping yourself from growing older or King Canute ordering the tide to go back.

Anyone who thinks these same people who cannot reliably forecast weather can change climate is a dumb hockeypuck.

   

What do you suggest? I'll look into some things that can be done but there are technical limtations. It's too bad HFC's weren't banned with CFC's, then I wouldn't hve to get my aircontioners redone in 10 years. but 7% would be pretty good I think. What is the unit of measurement?

   

The unit of measurement is tonnes of CO2-equivalent (meaning methane's global warming potential of 21 times CO2 has already been factored in, as have the other factors on the other species).

What I suggest is pursuing radical and agressive new ideas about how we use different kinds of energy.

Right now, coal fired power plants produce enormous quantities of waste heat. So much so that they're evaporating lakes. I suggest piping that hot water into cities for people to use to heat their homes so they don't have to burn natural gas.

I suggest installing new nuclear facilities to provide the steam for the oilsands so they can stop burning natural gas to produce their synthetic crude.

I suggest strict, agressive fuel economy standards for all road vehicles, and investigating ways of reducing the emissions from off-road vehicles as well (quads, boats, jetskis, skidoos, etc), whether that be restrictions on engine size or something else.

I suggest a simple program to help people get new, efficient furnaces. Something like "show us that you've replaced your 20 year old or older furnace with a new, efficient furnace and we'll let you claim it as a deduction on your taxes." No energy inspections, just a receipt and a tax break. Same kind of deal for cars. Prove you've replaced your 20 year old car with something new and fuel efficient, and you can claim, say, 10%-25% of the purchase price as a tax deduction.

Funding for cities to replace aging transit busses with hybrids or trolleys.

There are lots of things we can do, just nobody wants to do any of it.

   

I think Alcan can provide the help with simple aluminum foil. I read that one of the problems is that when the snow melts the earth absorbs the sun's energy where as when there is snow it reflects a substancial amount of this energy. So where the snow melts replace it with reflecting foil and it should at least help, eh!

   

What if Global Warming isn't a bad thing? Seriously. Back in the 1970's before he invented Global Warming the climatologist James Hansen warned us of global cooling that was being caused by pollution. We were supposed to be in the midst of global famines, the collapse of civilization, and the onset of a new ice age by now and, Praise God, global warming came along and saved us from the perils of a new ice age!

As opposed to the famines that the ice age was planned to bring on the UN World Health Organization recently noted that now more than half of the people in the world face health issues due to obesity - meaning that we are in a time of plenty.

NEVER in human history has the majority of the human population had to worry about obesity!

God Bless Global Warming!!!

   

Good post Bart!!!!!!

Now that is what I call "an INCONVENIENT TRUTH".

But then most facts and data are inconvenient truths to the AGW/KYOTO/IPCC axis of evil.

   

Seems to me that you used "arrogant" this way before. Realizing the Truth is not Arrogance, it is just Intelligence. Not really sure what your argument is supposed to imply other than just be a way to dismiss something without thinking about it.

I didn't realize PT Barnum had a stance on this/these issues. Personally I think he might be more inclined to dismiss your arguements rather than the arguments of Scientists.

   

Ridiculous.

   

1  2  3  Next