elfph

Solutions for global heating?

Recommended Posts

elfph    0

First, Good night.

I Was reading the physics of the future (which is an incredible book and I recommend it) and I saw some possible solutions for global heating,but all of then has an conter argument. So I google it, and guess what? It didn't find it, so anyone can help me? I would be grateful.

 

^-^

 

(Sorry for the bad english, Im brazillian)

Edited by elfph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blue89    19

unfortunately and sadly I don't believe that it would be possible to solve :(. because people are not aware the importance , especially who are uneducated ,or not so intelligent. I think they are bad/careless/unintelligent who did do these.

 

*** they are igniting forests every year epecailly in summers.(this is very bad. and this behavious is quite unintelligent (I don't want to be impolite ,but this is also...)

 

 

I dont know enough about this, but u.s.a. seems like a nice country, we know that this country contains rain forests or wider forests ,but the forests that exist there are still available and good.(I mean they protect it effectively)

 

if you are asking some scientific solutions ,then I think maybe it might be possible to create required gases at laboratories. but I am realistic ; I don't believe that it would be as original as Naturel , and I also think it would be expensive...

 

as a result ,I surely want to say that people who are igniting forests , are definitely not clever...

Edited by blue89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ken123    2

First, Good night.

I Was reading the physics of the future (which is an incredible book and I recommend it) and I saw some possible solutions for global heating,but all of then has an conter argument. So I google it, and guess what? It didn't find it, so anyone can help me? I would be grateful.

 

^-^

 

(Sorry for the bad english, Im brazillian)

On a different Thread I shared a possible solution:

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/101950-iron-in-ocean-to-grow-plankton-and-capture-co2-in-the-atmosphere/

Posted Today, 07:12 PM

Ken123, on 30 Dec 2016 - 6:45 PM, said:snapback.png

 

knowing global warming is limiting ocean upwelling thus plankton blooms, how much upwelling has been limited in the past and more important how much this limited upwelling has contributed to limited plankton blooms thus contributed to global warming?

If limited upwelling has great impact to global warming then considerations for mechanically drawing ocean water bottoms to the top should be actively explored.

 

I remember reviewing about 10% CO2 removal from the atmosphere by way of new plankton blooms from iron fertilization but there may be a higher atmosphere CO2 affect because of the upwelling concern.

 

I will try to see if there are any articles on this.

 

Picture of mechanical oceans bottoms uplift System concept:

http://i66.tinypic.com/idt25x.jpg

 

One year carbon tax pays for 10 ocean bottoms pumping systems magnitude cost $2 Billion(TBD).

 

A carbon tax of $2.2 Billion /Yr = 180 MM tones of LPG Global Carbon produced /Yr

 

Carbon tax:

Picture of carbon tax

 

http://i68.tinypic.com/2vlrwx2.jpg

 

http://carbonsolutio.../Calculator.php

 

LPG produced per year:

Picture of LPG produced per year

http://i63.tinypic.com/2llzwbs.jpg

 

http://www.poten.com...ts-Jan-2016.pdf

Ken123, on 31 Dec 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:snapback.png

Picture of mechanical oceans bottoms uplift Sydtem concept:

http://i66.tinypic.com/idt25x.jpg

 

One year carbon tax pays for 10 ocean bottoms pumping systems magnitude cost $2 Billion(TBD).

 

A carbon tax of $2.2 Billion /Yr = 180 MM tones of LPG Global Carbon produced /Yr

 

Carbon tax:

Picture of carbon tax

 

http://i68.tinypic.com/2vlrwx2.jpg

 

http://carbonsolutio.../Calculator.php

 

LPG produced per year:

Picture of LPG produced per year

http://i63.tinypic.com/2llzwbs.jpg

 

http://www.poten.com...ts-Jan-2016.pdf

 

AXIAL FLOW PUMP and line drop:

 

Picture of flow curve

http://i65.tinypic.com/nz3jts.jpg

 

http://www.ensival-moret.com/-products-CAHRM-CAHRK-?lang=en

 

Pressure Drop Online-Calculator

 

Picture of calculation

 

http://i66.tinypic.com/5ed36o.jpg

 

http://www.pressure-...ine-Calculator/

 

Picture of KE calculation

 

http://i63.tinypic.com/2n1do54.jpg

Edited by Ken123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ken Fabian    29

unfortunately and sadly I don't believe that it would be possible to solve :(. because people are not aware the importance , especially who are uneducated ,or not so intelligent. I think they are bad/careless/unintelligent who did do these.

 

*** they are igniting forests every year epecailly in summers.(this is very bad. and this behavious is quite unintelligent (I don't want to be impolite ,but this is also...)

 

 

I dont know enough about this, but u.s.a. seems like a nice country, we know that this country contains rain forests or wider forests ,but the forests that exist there are still available and good.(I mean they protect it effectively)

 

if you are asking some scientific solutions ,then I think maybe it might be possible to create required gases at laboratories. but I am realistic ; I don't believe that it would be as original as Naturel , and I also think it would be expensive...

 

as a result ,I surely want to say that people who are igniting forests , are definitely not clever...

 

I think it's a far greater problem that so many people who are educated and intelligent choose where to stand on climate and emissions according to criteria that have nothing to do with the validity of the science based advice. That so many in positions of power and influence lend respectability to denial of the problem's seriousness and to opposition appropriate policy responses to the expert advice is a more profound failure of trust and responsibility than "ordinary" people making the best of their own circumstances and opportunities in ignorance of the wider consequences. I suspect a great many of those "leaders" are aware of the importance, but that it is less immediately important to them and the organisations they lead than avoiding the burden of costs and complications of having to commit to a society wide remake of how we make and use energy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SFNQuestions    17

 

*** they are igniting forests every year epecailly in summers.(this is very bad. and this behavious is quite unintelligent (I don't want to be impolite ,but this is also...)

I think I have to ask you to further clarify what you are referencing, because there are rational reasons to burn sections of a forest. Who's igniting these forests? And why?

Anyway, here's how to solve global warming. Now all you have to worry about is global flooding.

 

Besides that, every now and then there's some scientists in the news who have built machines for liquefying carbon dioxide which they then store below ground, but it doesn't appear those machines will have a meaningful impact. The best way to stop it is to prevent it from getting worse and shift to sustainable agricultural practices, relying on renewable energy wherever possible. Whether or not that will work isn't debated so much, but rather whether or not it is economically feasible to carry out before it's too late.

Edited by SFNQuestions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Essay    89

...

Anyway, here's how to solve global warming. Now all you have to worry about is global flooding.

 

Besides that, every now and then there's some scientists in the news who have built machines for liquefying carbon dioxide which they then store below ground, but it doesn't appear those machines will have a meaningful impact. The best way to stop it is to prevent it from getting worse and shift to sustainable agricultural practices, relying on renewable energy wherever possible. Whether or not that will work isn't debated so much, but rather whether or not it is economically feasible to carry out before it's too late.

 

Here's a review for the video from your post:

Set in the distant future long after politicians have devised a "solution" to global warming, this animation first aired in 2002 as part of the Futurama episode, "Crimes of the Hot," and was subsequently used in Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth (Mr. Gore's daughter, Kristen, was a writer for the show).

 

Gore lent his voice to the episode, portraying his own head, which had been preserved in a glass jar for almost a millennium.

The episode was nominated for an Environmental Media Award, but it lost out to an episode of King of the Hill.

 

Some people can't (or don't want to) view videos, so a short summary and/or some quotes would be nice, and iirc, technically it is required by forum rules.

Since the review doesn't have the solution that you mentioned, could you provide a quote or summary that explains this part about "how to solve global warming?"

 

In addition to what you've mentioned above, some scientists have also figured out ways to convert CO2 into graphene, for building materials, or even converting CO2 into fuels.

 

Plus there is the old traditional method of turning CO2 into charcoal (via pyrolysis of biomass), which has many co-benefits including the great improvements to sustainable agricultural practices.

 

Workable answers are available, but (socio-politically) workable implementations are not yet widely enough available.

~

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SFNQuestions    17

 

Here's a review for the video from your post:

 

Some people can't (or don't want to) view videos, so a short summary and/or some quotes would be nice, and iirc, technically it is required by forum rules.

Since the review doesn't have the solution that you mentioned, could you provide a quote or summary that explains this part about "how to solve global warming?"

 

In addition to what you've mentioned above, some scientists have also figured out ways to convert CO2 into graphene, for building materials, or even converting CO2 into fuels.

 

Plus there is the old traditional method of turning CO2 into charcoal (via pyrolysis of biomass), which has many co-benefits including the great improvements to sustainable agricultural practices.

 

Workable answers are available, but (socio-politically) workable implementations are not yet widely enough available.

~

Who's to say it's not really a solution? Seems like just the kind of idea the current administration would implement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nzn    0

I think one of the most important of global heating is using chemical material for cleaning and washing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Handy andy    24

There is an elephant in the room no one has mentioned, ref global warming.

 

Rephrasing there is a super volcano in the Yellow stone national park, why not use geothermal in the states, they use it in other countries and even small islands, monsterrat for instance.

 

Question: Texas got rich from oil, why can the states overlapping the yellow stone not tap their geothermal, and get rich cooling the planet, via cheap electricity. ?

Answer: The economy runs on oil, and the politicians think global warming is not an issue they need to be concerned about.

 

Sea level rise has not happened as was predicted, because the climate change model was a little wrong. This is a an example of scientists starting something along the lines of a religious belief and now has lost the support of a lot of politicians and people, many still believe it, like ether theory :). Scientists claimed we know best, and got it wrong, then never publicly retracted or altered the claims. Global climate change and Sea level warming will drive stronger weather on parts of the planet, other areas will have milder weather, it could all just be cyclical, has any one checked the claims of oil companies and lobby groups who advise politicians, and pay huge sums into election campaigns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Strange    2543

Question: Texas got rich from oil, why can the states overlapping the yellow stone not tap their geothermal, and get rich cooling the planet, via cheap electricity. ?

Answer: The economy runs on oil, and the politicians think global warming is not an issue they need to be concerned about.

 

Or maybe it is just not economical. If someone could make money from it, they would (and the current administration probably wouldn't worry about a huge power-generation plant in a national park).

 

Sea level rise has not happened as was predicted, because the climate change model was a little wrong.

 

Is that true? It looks like sea levels are rising (although I don't know how well that matches predictions).

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now