• We hope all of you have a great holiday season and an incredible New Year. Thanks so much for being part of the Space community!

To stop global warming....

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

halcyondays

Guest
In some cases, locally, they can. It's a complex matter, subject to a great number of influences. However, in general, experience has shown that factors like war, disease, famine and above all high child mortality/poverty rates cause human populations to breed more prolifically, in order to counter perceived death rates. Across all human society the experience has been that the more prosperous societies become, the lower their birth rates. Change in birth rates is very slow, however, like slowing down the proverbial supertanker.
 
E

enigma10

Guest
which means, of course, in africa, they're trying to be like bunnies. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>
 
Q

qso1

Guest
Enigma10:<br /><br />Me:<br />HalcyonDays mentioned war, disease, famine...conditions experienced by all countries to one degree or another. He/she further mentions "Across all human society...<br /><br />I didn't see Africa singled out, nor did I see any superfluous comments about people being like bunnies. Seems your reading that into the comment. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
 
S

science_man

Guest
"We need more homosexuals around to slow down the birthrate."<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Agreed.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
 
B

bdewoody

Guest
You: I think that we need to simply eliminate fuel itslef. We need to figure out how to produce abundant energy that has no harmful effects on it's surroundings.<br /><br />Me: Boy, what a case of wishful thinking. Don't you think there are people out there who are working on energy sources that will have less of an effect on the environment.<br /><br />I leaned a long time ago that one does not get something for nothing. An energy source that does not pollute or have any negative impact on the environment is a pipe dream and probably will not exist in the forseeable future. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
Any and everything is possible, including clean energy. Wishful thinking leads to practical thinking, and practical thinking leads to productivity. Some one will discover how to create such an energy source, whether it happens today or next week or 1000 years from now. It will happen. The only thing to stop it is negative thinking, which you demonstrated. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
B

bdewoody

Guest
My thinking is not negative, just practical. 34 years ago when I was a senior in college I wrote a couple of term papers about fuels of the future. (We were on the verge of a fuel crisis then.) As I remember they were saying we would use up the world oil before the year 2000. I wrote about fusion, solar, hydrogen, geothermal (which by the way is possibly the least harmful to the environment where practical to exploit) and extracting energy from the oceans. While some of these have proven to be of some practical use none are the answer you seek.<br /><br />And I repeat we will never get something for nothing. All energy sources require the energy be stored by some process or another and in some way will have a cost attached, unless you are in a Galaxy far far away and a long time ago. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>
 
N

nexium

Guest
Some of the alternative energy is easier on the environment than coal or oil, but it is typically twices as costly, and rapid scale up could make it ten times more costly. The right kind of Government and private incentitives can hasten the transition to alternatives. We need to do many alternatives, as most can not supply more than 1% of Earth's energy needs. Neil
 
B

bdewoody

Guest
Kind of my point. We can't generate energy without some sort of fuel. We will never find a source of energy to generate electricity. power our vehicles etc. without consuming some sort of fuel. Granted some fuels are cleaner than others but they all have their drawbacks in one way or another. The only way we can stop our impact on the planet is to leave. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>
 
N

nexium

Guest
A few of us can leave Earth permanently in the next 12 years, but the cost may be a billion dollars each, and safety can not be garunteed. The colonists would stand by at the ISS = International space station until a slow, and close enough asteroid passes Earth. Upon landing on the asteroid the colonists would tunnel 20 meters or to the mass center (which ever is closser) A separate supply craft would be launched sooner if possible to bring several years supplies to the colonists. Obviously this does not reduce the impact on Earth's envirorment, but if we do this enough times, one of the colonies will eventually find a way to be self sufficient. Neil
 
E

enigma10

Guest
I read your comment just fine O' humorless one, and considering the state of africa in relation to war(mass genocides),Famine and disease(Aids?), how can africa not be leading the polls as top country for all 3 catagories. Punch that into the fact that there is very little birth control, often the age of the mother is very young, and overall average of lifespan is shortest on africa compared to any other country/continent, and you get exactly what i was talking about. Though my original comment was a tinge of humor, you've managed to kill that with your reply. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>
 
Q

qso1

Guest
My apologies, I didn't recognize the humor...as you say, I am the humorless one. I try to have a sense of humor, but this is a forum where all we have to go on are words. I don't know you personally, can't see any facial gestures etc. You get the idea.<br /><br />Again, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding this has caused. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
Well I guess in the end, you never really can get something for nothing. But people will never stop trying to achieve that. In my earlier post, I wrote about the use of magnetism. To me it is very logical to use magnetism to push a piston in an engine, instead of the combustion of gasoline. But I have no idea how millions on magnetic cars will affect the Earth's magnetic field(if there is any affect at all). This is just one of my schemes to "change the game" sort of speak.<br /><br /> And like I mentioned on an earlier post, the "big wigs" would never let me release such technology to the public. It will be stolen by the gov. and all my patents will be worthless. After all, this kind of technology would make oil all but obsolete(at least as a fuel). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
S

siarad

Guest
I did reply to your post with a possibility but you've not said how to retrieve energy from magnetism.
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
I not talking of retrieving energy from magnetism, but instead using the magnetic forces that a magnet already has. The push and pull effect could be used in the place of combustion in an engine. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about using simple magnetism to replace the combustion of gasoline. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
S

siarad

Guest
Yes but petrol recovers chemical energy.<br />I still don't see you have anything except perpetual motion if you're not recovering energy.<br />At least I postulated a mechanism whereby the heat of compression exceeded the Curie point killing magnetism for the return stroke, still perpetual motion though.<br />There's a big problem as magnetism reduces with distance whereas combustion produces it.<br />Come on, own up give us a clue <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />
 
N

nexium

Guest
If the piston is a permanent magnet, North on top: Another permant magnet South pole can be moved close to the piston then pulled away to prevent the magnets sticking. The 2nd magnet is then turned over so the North pole repels the piston. I suspect however a bit more energy is required to move, pull away and turn over the 2nd magnet than can be extracted from the moving piston. Neil
 
S

siarad

Guest
As I suspected it's perpetual motion doing no useful work. The energy is coming from whatever turns/moves the magnets.<br />It's incredibly inefficient too due to the large gap, an electric motor with it's small constant gap is way way way more efficient especially being rotary motion not needing cranshafts to convert it. Further the reversing acts at the most inefficent crank angle banging straight into the crank instead of turning it <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /><br />The most effective crank angle is halfway down the stroke & surprise, surprise an electric motor does just this <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />
 
S

science_man

Guest
Hey, I have idea to stop global warming! So does everyone else. But this one might work! Ok listen closely.<br /><br /> What if we released massive ammounts of hydrogen into the air centered in one main spot. Then that would push out the other gasses which are causing the Greenhouse Effect. It would make a "hole" in the sky to let the heat out. Now imagen one of these holes in every 10 sq feet on Earth! Wouldnt that help stop the greenhouse effect?<br /><br />If I am wrong please correct me, if I am sort of correct please support me <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />P.S. (is hydrogen the lightest gas in the world? if not then use the lightest gas in the world to do this)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts