Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Solutions for global heating?


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 elfph

elfph

    Lepton

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 29 July 2016 - 03:07 AM

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, 29 July 2016 - 03:08 AM.

  • 0

#2 blue89

blue89

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 415 posts

Posted 29 July 2016 - 08:36 AM

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, 29 July 2016 - 08:38 AM.

  • 0

#3 Ken123

Ken123

    Quark

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 31 December 2016 - 09:57 PM

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.sciencefo...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, 31 December 2016 - 09:59 PM.

  • 0

#4 Ken Fabian

Ken Fabian

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 100 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 1 January 2017 - 01:30 AM

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.


  • 0

#5 LizW12

LizW12

    Quark

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 27 January 2017 - 04:59 PM

You cant reverse a lot that has been done to the world. 


  • 0

#6 SFNQuestions

SFNQuestions

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 44 posts

Posted 17 February 2017 - 02:58 AM

 

*** 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, 17 February 2017 - 03:05 AM.

  • 0

#7 Essay

Essay

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 492 posts
  • LocationColorado State University

Posted 17 February 2017 - 08:53 AM

...

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.

~


  • 2
Fire oxidizes carbon; Pyrolysis reduces carbon.
It's time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire
--in order to manage our domain everlastingly.

#8 SFNQuestions

SFNQuestions

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 44 posts

Posted 17 February 2017 - 05:40 PM

 

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. 


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users