U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-20-2014, 08:58 AM
 
4,718 posts, read 8,943,246 times
Reputation: 2153

Advertisements

You already have that significant impact on OUR wallets and yes China and India need to be on board and reduce their pollution. Starting to look like China is getting on board even if it is because they can't breathe in their own cities. Any reduction in pollution is still a reduction.

We can go back to being isolationist and not expend any money outside of our borders or for our Citizens abroad. But that didn't work out so well the last time. I would go into further detail, but then I am straying from the rules for this "forum".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-20-2014, 04:44 PM
 
7,281 posts, read 8,835,592 times
Reputation: 11419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakster View Post
You already have that significant impact on OUR wallets and yes China and India need to be on board and reduce their pollution. Starting to look like China is getting on board even if it is because they can't breathe in their own cities. Any reduction in pollution is still a reduction.

We can go back to being isolationist and not expend any money outside of our borders or for our Citizens abroad. But that didn't work out so well the last time. I would go into further detail, but then I am straying from the rules for this "forum".
Actually, it did work out last time, it just so happened that the few decided for the many that globalization was the solution. It wasn't then and isn't now. It was all about money.

Your venturing out into that area of discussion is perfectly valid, it is a natural progression of the discussion. No one is being forced to read or post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 06:59 PM
 
Location: Volcano
12,971 posts, read 23,542,360 times
Reputation: 10573
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
That's then converted back into heat. I really think you are on the wrong track here, this is essentially the opposite argument of the heat itself from burning fossil fuels is creating warming which is equally as flawed. I calculated this once and in something like a few seconds the sun delivers the same BTU's to the earths surface that mankind has burned up in coal.
I hope you know that is not a genuine argument.

The issue with burning fossil fuels is not the heat energy fossil fuels use or release, but the way they have altered the atmospheric system which allow Earth's surface heat to radiate into space to balance out the energy received from the sun, and from the Earth's core.

The great thing about the way our global spaceship works is that even when excess heat from solar storms hits the planet, or vast quantities of excess heat are released by volcanic eruptions, or atomic explosions, or massive forest fires, or even sessions of Congress, over a relatively short period of time... years, rather than millenia... Earth can process that excess heat energy off the planet as infrared radiation and return to a balance that comfortably supports all the diversity of life that currently occupies it.

The real issue we face is that the accumulating level of "greenhouse" gasses in the atmosphere, chief among them carbon dioxide, is inadvertently changing the thermostatic setting of this natural system, allowing heat energy to be trapped and to build, which has profound effect in the long term on the overall health of every living thing.

This is not to say that increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are the only environmental issue we have to deal with, but it is the one that seems most likely to have a severe impact on our grandchildren's lives, and even more disturbingly, on the lives of their grandchildren. Many of those who are studying this issue carefully warn that we could pass the tipping point, the point of no return on reversing the adverse changes in our climate, within the next 20 years.

This is the essence of Green Living, to be committed to what some Native Americans call "considering the 7th generation" in all we do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2014, 02:06 AM
 
39,203 posts, read 40,587,898 times
Reputation: 16081
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD View Post
I hope you know that is not a genuine argument.
Of course not but it's an argument that I've heard put forth by the woefully uniformed in AGW discussions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
I like it when people make ridiculous claims like this, I always learn something researching it.... Anyhow..

So the sun delivers about 283 BTU per hour per square foot.

According to here the earth is 5,502,532,127,000,000 square foot... <gets out calculator...

That's 1,557,216,591,941,000,000 BTU's per hour the sun delivers to the earth.

Moving onto oil the US consumes a little over 7 billion barrels of oil per year, that's total including all petroleum products. 42 gallons to the barrel so we get 294,000,000,000 gallons of oil per year. Well use the BTU content of fuel oil which is just under 140,000 BTU's per gallon which gives us a grand total of :

41,160,000,000,000,000 BTU's per year from oil.

If we divide the amount of BTU's of the oil into the sun BTU's you get:

37.8, in other words at current oil usage in the US it would take almost 39 years to deliver the same amount of heat the sun delivers in one hour.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
I'll eleborate a little more, going from my previous post I've come up with the following figures:

  • 1,557,216,591,941,000,000 BTU's per hour is the mount of heat the sun delivers to earth.
  • 41,160,000,000,000,000 BTU's per year from oil consumption in the US.
Since our two biggest produces of heat are oil and coal I'll add the figure in for coal, the US consumes about 1 billion tons per year and each ton is probably about 22 million BTU's per ton.

  • 22,000,000,000,000,000 BTU's produced by coal within one year.
When we combine both figures the total BTU's for coal and oil comes out to 63,160,000,000,000,000 annually. To get a world total I'll throw out what I think is more than a fair figure. Do you think 20X what the US produces in year is fair? Using 20X we get 1,263,200,000,000,000,000 BTU's per year for worlds annual total.

When we divide that into the suns BTU's we come up with a figure of of 1.2.

Within 1.2 hours the sun delivers as many BTU's to the earths surface that us mere humans would produce in 1 year.

Are we beginning to grasp the magnitude of the sun vs, us? Let's suppose that for the last 100 years we produced the same amount of heat that we currently do so we'll get number of 126,320,000,000,000,000,000 for a centuries worth of heat produced by man. If we divide that by the suns BTU's per hour we get a number of 81, or 81 hours.

Even using modern amounts for the entire past century within 81 hours or a little over 3 days the sun delivers just as much heat to the earths surface as that produced by man over the last century.

Keep in mind I'm using some averages here, for example not all the oil we consume is burned and the BTU content number I used is probably way too high because I'm using numbers from a refined product. Obviously the total heat output per year is wrong but I'm pretty sure everything I've used is hugely biased towards more heat from man. I can do that because it's such a paltry amount compared to the sun.

The point of all of this is you might as well suggest a candle could heat up the Superdome.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2014, 07:42 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 51,238,770 times
Reputation: 24606
I suggest we continue to burn coal and petroleum and use the energy to develop an energy technology based on nuclear fission and fuel breeding. There are huge amounts of Thorium on the surface of the earth that could be "bred" into fissile nuclear fuel to power a world wide civilization at the first world economic levels.

I believe this technology is being suppressed by the international fossil fuel industry to protect their monopoly on energy and their current and future profits. That makes good sense to them at the expense of an uncertain future for the rest of us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2014, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati near
2,539 posts, read 3,509,764 times
Reputation: 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I suggest we continue to burn coal and petroleum and use the energy to develop an energy technology based on nuclear fission and fuel breeding. There are huge amounts of Thorium on the surface of the earth that could be "bred" into fissile nuclear fuel to power a world wide civilization at the first world economic levels.

I believe this technology is being suppressed by the international fossil fuel industry to protect their monopoly on energy and their current and future profits. That makes good sense to them at the expense of an uncertain future for the rest of us.
The technology is not being suppressed by the fossil fuel lobby, it is being suppressed in the name of nuclear nonproliferation. The same breeder reactor technology that can provide inexpensive power can also be used to enrich fissile material for nuclear weapons. I agree that it should be looked at again, but when the nonproliferation strategies were made back in the Jimmy Carter era, the world looked a lot different. In retrospect, I am not sure that the wrong decisions were made for that time and place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2014, 09:33 AM
 
39,203 posts, read 40,587,898 times
Reputation: 16081
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post

I believe this technology is being suppressed by the international fossil fuel industry to protect their monopoly on energy and their current and future profits. That makes good sense to them at the expense of an uncertain future for the rest of us.
Honestly Greg, if you have a tech that is revolutionary that is going to make you a boatload of money why would you suppress it?

There was great quote in the movie "Who killed the electric car?" and it went something like "GM would make a car that ran on pig **** if they could sell it."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2014, 09:44 AM
 
4,718 posts, read 8,943,246 times
Reputation: 2153
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Honestly Greg, if you have a tech that is revolutionary that is going to make you a boatload of money why would you suppress it?

There was great quote in the movie "Who killed the electric car?" and it went something like "GM would make a car that ran on pig **** if they could sell it."
Only if Pig farmers paid them a hefty kick back....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2014, 10:27 AM
 
7,281 posts, read 8,835,592 times
Reputation: 11419
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Honestly Greg, if you have a tech that is revolutionary that is going to make you a boatload of money why would you suppress it?

There was great quote in the movie "Who killed the electric car?" and it went something like "GM would make a car that ran on pig **** if they could sell it."
Instead, they made pig**** cars that ran on gas and sold them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2014, 12:21 PM
 
Location: Minnysoda
8,580 posts, read 8,497,595 times
Reputation: 5147
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Honestly Greg, if you have a tech that is revolutionary that is going to make you a boatload of money why would you suppress it?

There was great quote in the movie "Who killed the electric car?" and it went something like "GM would make a car that ran on pig **** if they could sell it."
I can make electricity on pig ****....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:00 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top