Solving Global Warming

[Irish Caesar]

A more interesting plan might be to convert all those useless atomic weapons to nuclear fuel to power a new generation of breeder reactors. Let's go over to at least 20% nuclear power. That'll go a large ways towards balancing our CO2 emissions.

I assume you mean 20% worldwide; the US is at roughly 21% nuclear, and Europe is 42%. (Figures from 2001)

There have been programs to do this--run power plants with weapons, it's certainly a good idea.

 

[Veritass]

Painful deaths, yes

But think about it

You solve global warming!

I'm sorry, but this Haiku does not quite add up to the right number of syllables. Try something along the lines of:

Painful deaths, who cares?
Overcrowding is solved by
Nuclear winter.

 

[Hotpoint]

On a slightly more serious note there is a technological solution to Global Warming that's been known about for years, seeding the oceans with iron to stimulate phytoplankton growth.

Iron fertilization is the intentional introduction of iron to the upper ocean to increase the marine food chain and to sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. It involves encouraging the growth of marine phytoplankton blooms by physically distributing microscopic iron particles in otherwise nutrient rich, but iron deficient blue ocean waters. An increasing number of ocean labs, scientists and businesses are exploring it as a means to revive declining plankton populations, restore healthy levels of marine productivity and/or sequester millions of tons of CO2 to slow down global warming. Since 1993, ten international research teams have completed relatively small-scale ocean trials demonstrating the effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5298004.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/286839.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/258114.stm

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002056.html

 

[Serutan]

Your city is more likely to get hit than mine. I mean really, had you ever heard of Vientiane before I posted from here?

Mostly because I am old enough to remember the Vietnam War.

OT, I have to say I'm surprised it's still open. The proposal, is of course, completely silly.

 

[El_Machinae]

I got a white car, they reflect more sunlight back up into space than a black car does. A full benefit with almost no opportunity cost.

 

[Smidlee]

Why do you want to solve global warming? Just think how much I could save on my electric bill in the winter. Last month was around $200 while in the summer it's rarely over $80.

 

[El_Machinae]

Why do you want to solve global warming?

To prevent the need for migrations (economy damaging) and reallocating infrastructure (expensive), some of that infrastructure being non-portable.

Edit: as well, to keep the global free market flowing as it should, instead of giving it a stupidly-huge interruption. I like the free market; I think that letting aspects of it run properly will make my life better than many other variants.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

I assume you mean 20% worldwide; the US is at roughly 21% nuclear, and Europe is 42%. (Figures from 2001)

There have been programs to do this--run power plants with weapons, it's certainly a good idea.

Well, damn, that's good news

I remember reading about one country (can't remember if it was France or Swefinorway) that is powered almost entirely by a combination of 1/3 nuclear, 1/3 hydroelectric and 1/3 wind. That's pretty amazing.

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

A more interesting plan might be to convert all those useless atomic weapons to nuclear fuel to power a new generation of breeder reactors. Let's go over to at least 20% nuclear power. That'll go a large ways towards balancing our CO2 emissions.

Unfortunately, environmentalist are\were against building more nuclear power plants.

 

[Irish Caesar]

I remember reading about one country (can't remember if it was France or Swefinorway) that is powered almost entirely by a combination of 1/3 nuclear, 1/3 hydroelectric and 1/3 wind. That's pretty amazing.

Sweden and Belgium are both over 50% nuclear, France and Lithuania are close to 80% nuclear. I'd try and find numbers for other types of energy, but they don't tend to show up in nuclear engineering textbooks...

 

[Souron]

Normally I would expect a proposal like this to be satire, but I am completely missing the point it is trying to make.

Perhaps, Stylesjl, you could explain why other methods of fighting global warming are ineffective? Or why global warming is such a big issue that it warrants such a drastic response? Or perhaps your point is something else altogether?

 

[classical_hero]

I actually prefer warmer weather.

 

[El_Machinae]

In order to get your warmer weather, many other people's lives will be made much worse.

 

[happy_Alex]

thread lock 3!

 

[classical_hero]

In order to get your warmer weather, many other people's lives will be made much worse.

Of course. As long as my life is pleasent, then I really do not care.

 

[El_Machinae]

Of course. As long as my life is pleasent, then I really do not care.

Our modern society has ethics, including something along the lines of "if you hurt someone, you either get their permission first or pay them". This is why I can take someone's car if I give them $2,000 but am a criminal if I shove them into a dumpster and take their car.

Getting your pleasant 'global warming' involves hurting other people, without compensation, first.

 

[classical_hero]

Try and think of the positives that Global worming can give you. How about having a permanent summer? I know that would be totally awesome. How about living under the sea? Now that would be cool, because there would be "no accusations, just friendly crustaceans."

 

[Bill3000]

Try and think of the positives that Global worming can give you. How about having a permanent summer? I know that would be totally awesome. How about living under the sea? Now that would be cool, because there would be "no accusations, just friendly crustaceans."

Global warming won't give a permanent summer, though, just increase the average temperature of the earth and change the climate patterns of the earth. Probably a more noticable effect would be an increase in the average amount of storms such as hurricanes before that.

Besides, there isn't enough water on the Earth to completely submerge the continents.

Heck, even though the odds of it happening are roughly zero, enough global warming can cause a runaway greenhouse effect and boil the oceans off.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Of course. As long as my life is pleasent, then I really do not care.

Considering that you live on the coast, your hometown would be destroyed, along with your livelihood and the livelihoods of your friends and family. Penniless and homeless, life sure is good sleeping under the overpass. Here's a phrase you should learn if global warming should be particularly nasty: "hey buddy, got a quarter?"

 

[classical_hero]

It will mean that land is affordable again.