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.
If you don't believe so ask why we have no choice in the type of gasoline we can put into our cars.
Because lead is a poison and the fact that it was spouted into the air from car exhaust for decades was one of the greatest self-inflicted disasters of the species.
Because lead is a poison and the fact that it was spouted into the air from car exhaust for decades was one of the greatest self-inflicted disasters of the species.
Last I checked, we have a longer life expectancy, but a shorter quality of living. In other words we are living longer, but less healthy. Take America for instance. Richest country in the world, with some of the most unhealthiest population. Health care system kills millions a year. Obesity and disease does the rest. Death rates are higher now more than ever. Crime and loss is at record highs. Please tell me what is so much better today than yesterday.
Suicide is painless,
It brings on endless changes,
You can learn to dig it if you try.
Are you asking about green energy, or losing technology?
Green energy - the only thing that shows any promise is solar panels and nuclear power. Everything else gives energy that is too sporadic or has too many bad side-effects.
Nuclear power is not green. Green power is renewable and sustainable. Nuclear energy is neither.
Solar energy is inexhaustible, and so are the secondary sources that are driven by solar energy, such as wind and wave power and even biomass. Tide power, driven by gravitational effects of the moon, is promising, but in its infancy. Geothermal is developing nicely, while hydrothermal as also in its infancy, but they are well worth exploring because they are renewable energy resources, unlike fossil fuel and nuclear energy, which are finite, and have ecologically damaging side effects. Fusion power holds some possible promise, but nobody has cracked the code on that one yet.
And I think it's a mistake to think that any one of those sources has to be monolithic in order to wean us off fossil fuels. Fractional sources add up to a larger whole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tariqblaze
I have heard pretty bad side effects to solar panels as well.
As PV panels hit the end of serviceable life the recycling industry will rise to the need, I'm sure. And lets not forget that the technology is evolving rapidly. In the near future PV panels could be based on a totally different set of materials, possibly organic in nature.
Also don't forget, PV panels are only one form of solar energy use. Here on the Big Island we also have a commercial solar concentrater feeding electricity to the grid. Also, all new construction on the island is required to install solar water heaters. That's another fractional gain.
Quote:
The question im asking is what about those that choose to do so. Those that choose to walk over a car. Write over type. Sail over fly. Instead of offering these people new tech as alternatives to unhealthy tech, why offer them anything. Nothing. Going back to nothing would be better for these people would it not?
People always have the personal option to drop out, and embrace minimalism. They always have. Some do. Many tire of it, and eventually return. Subsistence farming is backbreaking work. Writing by hand is nowhere as productive or efficient as writing on a computer, and there's already a serious discussion afoot about dropping handwriting from school curricula since it's becoming obsolete. And Larry Ellison's team's win in the Americas Cup proved the superiority of hard airfoils over traditional cloth sails. Technology keeps evolving and people are free to embrace it or not.
My personal take on it is that technology will provide the means to harness the abundant renewable sources of energy, so we can stop fouling our nest with the byproducts of the non-renewable sources we are so heavily dependent on today.
Also don't forget, PV panels are only one form of solar energy use. Here on the Big Island we also have a commercial solar concentrater feeding electricity to the grid. Also, all new construction on the island is required to install solar water heaters. That's another fractional gain.
People always have the personal option to drop out, and embrace minimalism.
I think what you fail to realize is there are complications with every new technology. Even old.
You still didnt answer the question. Of course people opt out. Im asking your personal opinion what you believe. Do you believe that green is the one stop shop, or do you believe opting out might be better? If not explain why it is not and you believe green energy is the perfect solution.
Just remember nobody is perfect so please stop being so unrealistic when talking about green energy..Unless you are getting paid by GE to write these post.
Nuclear power is not green. Green power is renewable and sustainable. Nuclear energy is neither.
Solar energy is inexhaustible, and so are the secondary sources that are driven by solar energy, such as wind and wave power and even biomass. Tide power, driven by gravitational effects of the moon, is promising, but in its infancy. Geothermal is developing nicely, while hydrothermal as also in its infancy, but they are well worth exploring because they are renewable energy resources, unlike fossil fuel and nuclear energy, which are finite, and have ecologically damaging side effects. Fusion power holds some possible promise, but nobody has cracked the code on that one yet.
And I think it's a mistake to think that any one of those sources has to be monolithic in order to wean us off fossil fuels. Fractional sources add up to a larger whole.
The earth's core, the major component allowing this planet to be habitable, operates on nuclear fission. Radionuclides are going to decay regardless of our actions or inactions. Harvesting that energy source is no different than absorbing light from the sun. Please explain to me how that is not green? I agree with mostly everything else you stated.
Truth be told, and I really dislike agreeing with the tin foil hat guy. But green energy is a made up term to appeal to those who prefer a more simplistic life. Anyone who disagrees needs to familiarize themselves with a basic law of physics. The law of conservation. Marketing 101. People are conscienctous towards this saving the planet thing. So instead of having customers reduce their usage, which is the only way to truely conserve energy, we have been fed a feel good alternative.
Last edited by Sandlapper3396; 10-09-2013 at 03:37 AM..
You still didnt answer the question. Of course people opt out. Im asking your personal opinion what you believe. Do you believe that green is the one stop shop, or do you believe opting out might be better? If not explain why it is not and you believe green energy is the perfect solution.
Simply, obviously, most people are not going to opt out of society to "grow their own." Realistically speaking, the opposite is true.
Quote:
Just remember nobody is perfect so please stop being so unrealistic when talking about green energy..Unless you are getting paid by GE to write these post.
GE makes generators that run on fossil fuels, and GE makes hydro power turbines and wind power turbines, and other major power equipment as well, so I doubt they'll be much inconvenienced whichever way... ahem... the wind blows.
Besides, trying to discount another's opinion by gratuitously accusing them of being a stooge for some company or special interest is nothing more than a lame debate trick. "If you don't agree with me, then you must be one of THEM!" Well, no, actually, I'm a completely independent thinker, with no particular allegiance except to workability.
As I've mentioned before, I live in a place where over 40% of the electricity sold by HELCO, the local utility, is generated from alternative sources, and where many of my neighbors utilize solar energy in one way or another.
We're not yet capable of generating all of the power we need from green, renewable sources, but we really have no choice but to keep developing and deploying these technologies. First, fossil fuel is a finite resource which is being depleted, and though we won't run out tomorrow, it is entirely predictable that we will run out someday in the foreseeable future. Second, the burning of all that fossil fuel has dire environmental effects, that if unchecked could dramatically affect the livability of the planet. It's a closed loop system, and all the pollution we create doesn't just magically go away.
Personally I believe strongly in Solar energy, which is not only clean and abundant, but which does have the capacity to easily fulfill of mankind's energy needs if properly harnessed. While we're working towards that hopeful future, however, we have to utilize everything else we do have currently available to drive down fossil fuel use, while we still have time.
The earth's core, the major component allowing this planet to be habitable, operates on nuclear fission.
Actually, it's now thought that perhaps half the heat from the earth's core is derived from radioactive decay. The idea of fission occurring down there has been pretty well discounted. The rest comes from other factors such as gravitational effects. But geothermal energy taps this deep heat source in a meaningful way, and I think we'll see much more concentration on this source in the future. There's a geothermal plant not far from here that has been successfully operating for 20 years which has just currently in the permit process to double the size of the operation.
Quote:
Radionuclides are going to decay regardless of our actions or inactions. Harvesting that energy source is no different than absorbing light from the sun. Please explain to me how that is not green? I agree with mostly everything else you stated.
First, we only have practical access fissionable materials in a relatively thin layer near the surface, and those deposits are not only finite, but by some accounts the known reserves are already shrinking. Second, the by-products of nuclear energy are horrendous to deal with, remaining dangerous in some cases for 10,000 years or more, and disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima remind us of the extreme damage nuclear reactors can do. Japan is now on the way to decommissioning every single one of their nuclear plants, at enormous cost to their society. This is already prompting a huge upsurge in Japanese research into alternate energy systems.
Quote:
Truth be told, and I really dislike agreeing with the tin foil hat guy. But green energy is a made up term to appeal to those who prefer a more simplistic life.
Depends on who is using it, and how it is used. Like many others I use it simply to refer to renewable and sustainable energy sourcing.
Quote:
Anyone who disagrees needs to familiarize themselves with a basic law of physics. The law of conservation. Marketing 101. People are conscienctous towards this saving the planet thing. So instead of having customers reduce their usage, which is the only way to truely conserve energy, we have been fed a feel good alternative.
Yes, reducing energy use is important too. But with such a huge amount of energy falling on the globe every day, utilizing more solar power is a no-brainer.
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.
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.
