Earth Day (belated)
| Author | Topic: Earth Day (belated) |
|---|---|
|
Law Bringer
Member # 4153
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 11:57
Profile
Homepage
Earth Day was this previous Sunday, for those of you who were unaware (or for those who don't celebrate it). And it got me thinking, why haven't we had an environmental thread in General? We've covered religion many times, politics in general has been kicked around quite a bit, so why not the environment? The topic at hand, then, is this: Do we have a problem? Will it resolve itself, can we fix it, and who/what is to blame? (I would've posted this on Saturday, but time has not been my friend for the past few days) -------------------- Gamble with Gaea, and she eats your dice. I hate undead. I really, really, really, really hate undead. With a passion. Posts: 4130 | Registered: Friday, March 26 2004 08:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 14:31
Profile
Homepage
If you're talking about something as vast and general as "the environment", it's a bit hard to have a meaningful discussion. In some places, there will be problems, in other places, there won't be. If you're specifically referring to global warming, say so. [ Monday, April 24, 2006 14:32: Message edited by: Ash Lael ] -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
BANNED
Member # 4
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 15:07
Profile
Homepage
Well, whatever the problems and its varying causes might be, "stop raping the planet" would be a good place to START. Honestly- considering how we still depend massively on the environment, I'd consider this one of the LEAST politically charged propositions around. -------------------- * Posts: 6936 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 5969
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 15:20
Profile
I saw this really scary thing on Nova or something the other night, about "global dimming" (increased cloudage due to particles floating around in the air because of pollution) and how it's actually counteracting global warming, and if not for global dimming, global warming would speed way up and we'd all be very screwed over. Makes me wonder how we're still going to live when I grow up. -------------------- A C, an E-flat, and a G walk into the Tower of the Magi. Ambrin walks up to them and says, "Hey! It's the Triad!" Kelner snorts and says, "Pretty minor Triad if you ask me." Posts: 242 | Registered: Thursday, June 16 2005 07:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 15:29
Profile
Homepage
My experience with environmental regulation has been a bad one, unfortunately, which basically involved the Queensland government making "environmental protection" laws that had the opposite effect to what was intended. Naturally, neither the media nor the government were able to grasp this concept. So, yeah, I don't think it's a simple issue, and I'm a bit sceptical of the media's general treatment of it as such, and even more sceptical of "SAVE THE PLANET!" exclamations coming from people who pretty much get their information about the issue only from the media. In short, the emotiveness of the whole "THE PLANET IS GOING TO DIE!!" thing has polarized the debate to the point that it's difficult to reasonably assess what the situation is, so I don't have much of an opinion either way. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Master
Member # 4614
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 17:47
Profile
Homepage
I'm for doing certain things to protect the environment. Everyone should try to take responsibility for things like recycling, power conservation, and new and more efficient energy use. Not wasting your environment is a good way to preserve it. However, people have set up many harsh environmental regulations that actually have an adverse effect on the state of things. There's all these billions of dollars spends on smokestack scrubbers, fish-friendly rivers, wolf-protecting regulations, and prevention of the use of certain Alaskan oil fields that are many times a little unreasonable. Sometimes you have to hurt the environment a little to meet a different, more urgent need that saving some rare species of Tahitian flamingo. -------------------- -ben4808 Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:16
Profile
Homepage
Anti-environmentalists argue that it's natural for the climate and species balance in ecosystems to change over time, so we shouldn't be alarmed by the fact that that's currently happening. That's a fair enough argument, as far as it goes. But extinction is also natural, and to expect that humans will be immune to it is sheer hubris. We're in the middle of what is unarguably a global mass extinction, almost certainly caused primarily by us. It's very unlikely that anything we can do will scour the planet clear of life, but it may not be so hard to make global environmental conditions incompatible with the survival of the human species if we don't make an effort to avoid doing so. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1092
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:18
Profile
Homepage
Here's a good, wholesome, safe power source that works and will last for long time, nut some idiots are making a big deal out of it (I can't see why though). Support nuclear power today! -------------------- When you think you can't get any lower in life and hit rock bottom, God hands you a shovel. Why should I say somthin intelligent when idiots like you make me look intelligent in the first place. Posts: 615 | Registered: Friday, May 3 2002 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 3441
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:20
Profile
Homepage
Keeping the earth in good shape is not of paramount importance to me. I'm going to spend my whole life getting things off of the earth, so I see the earth as less "sacred" then some might. Obviously, I don't want to turn the earth into a giant industrial waste depository either. You have to find a balance between ecology and progress, and to be honest, I think we're doing all right. Out of curiosity, who here has read State of Fear, by Michael Crichton? -------------------- "As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it." --Albert Einstein -------------------- Posts: 536 | Registered: Sunday, September 7 2003 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 2836
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:23
Profile
quote:The recent nuclear power stations have been generally unsafe. Remember Chernobyl? TMI? It may, probably will be possible to use nuclear power in the future, except a lot of work has to be done first. Posts: 587 | Registered: Tuesday, April 1 2003 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 3441
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:25
Profile
Homepage
Don't let *i hear you saying that, Stew Boy. As an aside, Chernobyl occured because the operators there were performing unauthorized tests and such. TMI released almost no radiation (it was well within acceptable limits). -------------------- "As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it." --Albert Einstein -------------------- Posts: 536 | Registered: Sunday, September 7 2003 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1092
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:36
Profile
Homepage
I believe that we have progressed far enough in Nuclear technology that it makes it look like someone may have caused the accident in Chernobyl on purpose, or they didn't know what they were doing. -------------------- When you think you can't get any lower in life and hit rock bottom, God hands you a shovel. Why should I say somthin intelligent when idiots like you make me look intelligent in the first place. Posts: 615 | Registered: Friday, May 3 2002 07:00 |
|
The Establishment
Member # 6
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:40
Profile
quote:Chernobyl was quite a disaster. One that was, sadly, horribly preventable. Bad design that the Soviets were warned about including positive reactivity coefficients, overmoderation, poor shutdown mechanisms, lack of containment, etc. Bad operating protocols that lacked a focus on safety and regulations. Poor emergency response, no evacutation plans or bans on ingestion. The immediate death toll was under 50 and the total expected (according to the IAEA) can be about 4000. The unfortunate thing is that had the Soviets banned the drinking of milk after the accident limiting Sr-90 intake, virtually all of them could be prevented. Also, had the government reacted better the psychological effects could have been mitigated, which are the largest impact. The good news is that no such designs exist in the US. Three Mile Island was perhaps the biggest non-disaster ever. The core did melt partially, but only negligible and planned radiation releases were made. In other words, the containment systems worked. Fortunately, no one was hurt . Note that since Three Mile Island, the nuclear industry has made great strides in safety, now having less on site personnel accidents at a nuclear plant than a typical office worker. Newer advanced light water reactors being built are a factor of 10-100 less likely to undergo an accident, major or minor. The designs are simpler and work on natural forces such as gavity, natural convection, and pressure gradients. As far as the safety issue, that one has pretty well been addressed. You are far more likely to be killed in a car accident, from second hand smoke, or be struck by lightning than be die as a result of in a nuclear accident. The probability is about on the same order of being killed by a meterorite. Far more potent issues with nuclear power are the spent fuel and the proliferation. These are of greater concern, but also have solutions to them. -------------------- Your flower power is no match for my glower power! Posts: 3726 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1092
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:45
Profile
Homepage
That's pretty much my main point here... -------------------- When you think you can't get any lower in life and hit rock bottom, God hands you a shovel. Why should I say somthin intelligent when idiots like you make me look intelligent in the first place. Posts: 615 | Registered: Friday, May 3 2002 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 19:53
Profile
Homepage
It is definitely true that, as with any politically controversial issue, there is a lot of misinformation out there about environmental issues. There are facts, though, and they are pretty disturbing at times. But, you know, I don't think that environmental issues will be solved by environmental arguments. I don't think that enough people really give a damn about the spotted owl. I do think that people understand that gas prices are going up right now, and they're only going to get higher, so buying a car that doesn't use a lot of fuel makes good monetary sense. Likewise, it's a pretty big investment to put solar panels on your roof, but energy bills are only getting higher, and PG&E (our local energy provider here in California) is rather dysfunctional. We have blackouts during peak usage from time to time. Buying a few solar panels makes good sense for those who want to save some money and not have to deal with the vagaries of the energy company. Besides, I live in California. SF is a bit different, but our neighbors down south in LA get about 360 sunny days per year. Solar power makes sense. These, I think, are the arguments that will convince people, not OMG TEH WORLD IS LIEK GOIGN 2 DIE!!!!111 [ Monday, April 24, 2006 19:56: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 6912
|
written Monday, April 24 2006 20:04
Profile
Nuclear power does seem like an untapped potential. I was told that more people died on oil related accidents than Chernobyl but that’s just something I heard from a not such a reliable source. I have mixed feelings about pollution. I am against stiff domestic laws on pollution I think those things need to be international. It will always be unfair to some country but that seems to be inevitable no matter what you do. Should be along the lines of an X amount of pollution per square mile of your territory. (trade embargos and naval blockades should be used for violators) I agree this will screw over a lot of underdeveloped countries and help countries you have a ton of land (Russia, Canada) but of all the things I can think of this seems the fairest. (Perhaps this can be balanced out by a country giving up some of its pollution potential to another the main point is not go beyond a certain limit talk about an economy boost for Canada if it starts to sell it hehe) This only goes for air pollution by the way My problem with domestic laws is that it doesn’t solve anything. We live in a world where a business can move to another country and all you have done is lost jobs and money that your country would have had originally. Posts: 89 | Registered: Wednesday, March 15 2006 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1092
|
written Tuesday, April 25 2006 01:48
Profile
Homepage
Nuclear power is completely underated and should be taken up for its many advantages. It creates a lot of energy per bit of U-23 (i think it's 23) than an equivalent size piece of coal, and creates very little pollution. -------------------- When you think you can't get any lower in life and hit rock bottom, God hands you a shovel. Why should I say somthin intelligent when idiots like you make me look intelligent in the first place. Posts: 615 | Registered: Friday, May 3 2002 07:00 |
|
The Establishment
Member # 6
|
written Tuesday, April 25 2006 04:35
Profile
Fuel in a typical reactor is U-235. Natural uranium consists primarily of two isotopes U-235 and U-238 (there is a little bit of U-234 for the pedantic). Both are capable of undergoing fission. However, U-235 is capable of doing so with slow or thermal neutrons. This is attractive for a variety of reasons: a thermal flux leads to a higher fission probability, allows use of traditional coolants such as water, and less radiation damage to structures. Although it is not possible to sustain a chain reaction on pure U-238, it is possible for it to capture a neutron and transmute the element to Pu-239. Pu-239 is highly fissile and can make a good fuel, although one needs to be a little bit more careful with it as a Pu-239 powered reactor has a lower control margin. Another fuel discussed is Th-232. Although not fissile by itself, it can make U-233, another fissile isotope. There is a lot of thorium on this planet and between uranium and thorium, there is enough fuel to sustain our civilization indefinitely. Yes, nuclear reactions are about a hundred thousand times more energetic than a chemical reaction. This is attractive as it keeps the waste contained and it makes the energy supply very insensitive to fuel cost. Stability in prices is important to business and is one of the primary reasons industry is looking to expand nuclear power today. -------------------- Your flower power is no match for my glower power! Posts: 3726 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Tuesday, April 25 2006 06:02
Profile
Nuke, Nuke, Nuke Nuke for Earth, Nuke, Nuke ... -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |