Why The World Is Ending As We Know It

[Joodoo]

A better question is when the world will end.

[The Weird One]

A better question is when the world will end.

In a few billion years...possibly a few hundred billion. one or the other, though.

[Juan_Bottom]

A better question is when the world will end.

In a few billion years...possibly a few hundred billion. one or the other, though.

Yeah, when that drifting Black Hole gets here, a few hundred billion years.

[The Weird One]

A better question is when the world will end.

In a few billion years...possibly a few hundred billion. one or the other, though.

Yeah, when that drifting Black Hole gets here, a few hundred billion years.

No, I forget which will happen first, but either the sun will go out or somesuch or the earth's core will go cold.

[Iliad]

A better question is when the world will end.

In a few billion years...possibly a few hundred billion. one or the other, though.

Yeah, when that drifting Black Hole gets here, a few hundred billion years.

sun will enlarge itself and f*ck earth over big time in 4.6 billion years. Any time now

[Neoteny]

A better question is when the world will end.

In a few billion years...possibly a few hundred billion. one or the other, though.

Yeah, when that drifting Black Hole gets here, a few hundred billion years.

Wait, what happened to that black hole we were going to create?

[The Weird One]

A better question is when the world will end.

In a few billion years...possibly a few hundred billion. one or the other, though.

Yeah, when that drifting Black Hole gets here, a few hundred billion years.

Wait, what happened to that black hole we were going to create?

Talk to the conspiracy theorists.

[muy_thaiguy]

A better question is when the world will end.

In a few billion years...possibly a few hundred billion. one or the other, though.

Yeah, when that drifting Black Hole gets here, a few hundred billion years.

Wait, what happened to that black hole we were going to create?

The Swiss figured that they would be swallowed up in it as well.

[DaGip]

A better question is when the world will end.

It officially ended today :

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/14/anheus ... topstories

[Joodoo]

A better question is when the world will end.

It officially ended today :

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/14/anheus ... topstories

I don't drink so it's no problem to me.

[DaGip]

A better question is when the world will end.

It officially ended today :

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/14/anheus ... topstories

I don't drink so it's no problem to me.

It really isn't about drinking, I guess. Budweiser beer has been stereotypically American since I was a kid. Maybe I am too old and sentimental over such things. Just another sign of the failing American economy.

[tzor]

A better question is when the world will end.

It officially ended today :

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/14/anheus ... topstories

No, this is the start of a brave new world; a world where Americans will drink REAL BEER.

Can you hear the people sing?
Singing a song of angry men
It is the singing of a people
Who will not drink Bud again!
When the people start to drink
From the delightful microbrew
They will give those old cliesdales
A great fond adeu!

[Juan_Bottom]

A better question is when the world will end.

It officially ended today :

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/14/anheus ... topstories

No, this is the start of a brave new world; a world where Americans will drink REAL BEER.

Can you hear the people sing?
Singing a song of angry men
It is the singing of a people
Who will not drink Bud again!
When the people start to drink
From the delightful microbrew
They will give those old cliesdales

Ok, I get where corn beer came from. And why Americans exclusivly drink it. But why they don't upgrade is beyond me. Must be price. The war is over people.

I worked as an assisstant beer delivery guy for a couple of days this summer. Whatever broke on your route you could keep. Idiots would bust cases of Miller and take it home. Now why, Oh why, wouldn't they go for the Sam Adams or something? I don't drink, so maybe I don't understand.
The world of American Beer didn't end during the war. It was put on hold...
A great fond adeu!

[PLAYER57832]

We have the technology to do away with oil completely. (Shock and horror, but it's true.) We can build hot water solar electric generating plants that store the hot water during the day for 24/7 electrical power generation. We can go 100% solar if we use Federal land for the system.

This is just plain wrong on so many levels. To begin with, if you put solar power on all those "open Federal lands" you seem to think are just out there, you would displace whole ecosystems that, ultimately DO impact us and the way we live. Just because you are in a populated area and not the woods, does not mean you can do without those woods.

That someone as intelligent as you obviously are would even think such a thing speaks VOLUMES for the poor state of education ... specifically natural sciences.

Secondly, there just are not enough materials to make enough Solar panels. Wind has more potential for electric power, but there still is not enough available land and so forth. It will help, but not solve the problem.

We can replace gas cars with all electric cars that go off this solar grid.

Neither wind nor solar have much potential for transportation, unless you count possibly running some electric trolleys and such, which would work on a limited basis in some bigger cities, but not overall.

We can do this now, with existing technology.

No, we cannot. It would be quite nice, but is a pipe dream

Even if we don't do this, if we only did this 50% we would be walking into a new era as brave and fantastic as that era that came about when we abandoned the horse for the model T.

But the fact is that we didn't have the Model T until the city streets were deep in horse manure. When it becomes profitable it will happen. And the world will change. The old world will end; the new world will begin. "See I make all things new."

You are half right in that last part. Things will happen, BUT the biggest change is that we are all going to have to do without a lot of things in the short term.

Also, you completely underestimate the time involved in making the change and the amount of change necessary to effect the changes.

Trees present a wonderful resource for building materials, BUT they have to be logged. So-called environmentalists want to do away with all logging. (REAL environmentalists want to change logging practices, but not do away with it, but unfortunately they are not the ones making the stinks and waging lawsuits).

Trains could provide much more efficient mass transit and good transport than trucks, but that would put a lot of truckers out of business and the US has been intent on dismanteling its Rail system for years. The rails are all privately owned and maintenance is a complete patchwork of inefficiency. Some do well, others .... are why we have derailments more and more now.

Soy was once touted as the answer to beef. BUT, it turns out that the production of soy is now perhaps more destructive to the ecosystems, the environment where they are grown than beef.

None of this even addresses the fact that the earth is ALREADY warming. Come changes are ALREADY in place that are unlikely to be reversed for a good deal of time. WE had a window and passed it by.

I could go on and on and on ... but the point is there is no quick or easy answer.

[tzor]

We have the technology to do away with oil completely. (Shock and horror, but it's true.) We can build hot water solar electric generating plants that store the hot water during the day for 24/7 electrical power generation. We can go 100% solar if we use Federal land for the system.

This is just plain wrong on so many levels. To begin with, if you put solar power on all those "open Federal lands" you seem to think are just out there, you would displace whole ecosystems that, ultimately DO impact us and the way we live. Just because you are in a populated area and not the woods, does not mean you can do without those woods.

That someone as intelligent as you obviously are would even think such a thing speaks VOLUMES for the poor state of education ... specifically natural sciences.

Secondly, there just are not enough materials to make enough Solar panels. Wind has more potential for electric power, but there still is not enough available land and so forth. It will help, but not solve the problem.

Please read my post. I said "hot water" not "solar panels." The (literally old fashioned) hot water technology requires mirrors to focus the sun to a central location where it would be concentrated enough to heat the water moving in a central tower to boiling.

As to any threat to ecosystems, I would hate to be cruel but I have to think of the cost and the benefits. After all reliance on coal has almost destroyed wildlife in the North East due to the fallout of acid rain. The advantage of a hot water system is one can store the energy as hot water when the sun isn't shining. You don't have that advantage with direct electric generation systems like solar panels and wind turbines and they can be more annoying than beneficial to the electric grid.

[tzor]

You are half right in that last part. Things will happen, BUT the biggest change is that we are all going to have to do without a lot of things in the short term.

Also, you completely underestimate the time involved in making the change and the amount of change necessary to effect the changes.

Trees present a wonderful resource for building materials, BUT they have to be logged. So-called environmentalists want to do away with all logging. (REAL environmentalists want to change logging practices, but not do away with it, but unfortunately they are not the ones making the stinks and waging lawsuits).

Trains could provide much more efficient mass transit and good transport than trucks, but that would put a lot of truckers out of business and the US has been intent on dismanteling its Rail system for years. The rails are all privately owned and maintenance is a complete patchwork of inefficiency. Some do well, others .... are why we have derailments more and more now.

Soy was once touted as the answer to beef. BUT, it turns out that the production of soy is now perhaps more destructive to the ecosystems, the environment where they are grown than beef.

None of this even addresses the fact that the earth is ALREADY warming. Come changes are ALREADY in place that are unlikely to be reversed for a good deal of time. WE had a window and passed it by.

I could go on and on and on ... but the point is there is no quick or easy answer.

Yes we are going to have to do without a lot of things; the old Hummer, the huge SUV; most people won't need them and those people who do won't have to use them for every day driving. The new people's car is already here, the SMART car gets 30-40 mpg and costs $11,000 which makes it down right affordable in more ways than one.

The important thing to remember is we don't have to go cold turkey. If we dropped our consumption in half that in and of itself would be massively significant.

I maintain a very traditionalist viewpoint with regards to wood. Anything made from wood should last as long (or longer) as the age of the tree used to make the product, so when it needs replacement the replacement tree is old enough to be used. The problem with environmental regulations in this regard is that in order to "reforest" cut areas with the prefered fast growing pines, they have to get rid of the slower growing trees because those trees grow faster as saplings than the pine trees. The defolient used to get this to happen gets into the system. Several years ago I was hunting beat in Maine and I saw a moose who, well frankly, wasn't all there as a moose if you know what I mean. The locals blamed the defolient for his condition.

As for trains puting trucks out business, I'm sorry but the trucks were the ones who nearly put the trains out of business. Their lobby has allowed double trailer trucks to take over the interstate highways, which is one of the reasons why people feel the need to drive big gas guzzling cars. Their drivers blatently disregard any law designed for their safety because their profit margins are so damn low that they have to push themselves to the point of exaustion in order to make a decent living. No I am not sorry for them in the least; especially since they weren't sorry for the engineers the brakemen etc who they caused to be laid off because they killed the railroad freight business.

And as for the perpetual (It's been bull since they raised it up on the old sci fi show Sea Quest DSV and it's bull today) cry to kill all the cows; this is another example of global warming paranoia. It's the same BS that wants us to have every house be a potential EPA disaster recovery site (I kid you not, check up on the EPA regulations for when one of those mini flursent bulbs breaks - it's a mercury contamination disaster zone with every broken bulb).

As for global warming, whether is true that we can't stop or prevent it, the fact that shit happens all the time and we have to adapt. Global warming didn't give us the "dust bowl" in a prior century. Global warming won't be responsible should half of Califorina decide one day (as everyone is telling us) that it wan't to be it's own sub-continent. Volcanoes will still erupt no matter what the temperature, tital waves will still form and so on and so forth. We have to be prepared for anything.

Even, (gasp) global cooling.

[PLAYER57832]

Please read my post. I said "hot water" not "solar panels." The (literally old fashioned) hot water technology requires mirrors to focus the sun to a central location where it would be concentrated enough to heat the water moving in a central tower to boiling.

In that case, my answer is even more true. There just is not the space, etc.

A potential for home heating is Geothermal heating. I may be using such a system myself. But, the real problem is that while each of these things will help some, none will solve the problems, even with extreme conservations

As to any threat to ecosystems, I would hate to be cruel but I have to think of the cost and the benefits. After all reliance on coal has almost destroyed wildlife in the North East due to the fallout of acid rain.

This is not a matter of cruelty, but of education. WE, we human beings depend on the natural ecosystem directly in many ways, and indirectly in that the loss of species is like the old canaries in the coal mines (for any unaware, they died just before the air became lethally toxic to humans, giving people some time to escape ... usually enough time). When frogs are dying, as they are now world wide, it bodes us to know why and how because it is quite likely that whatever is killing so many frogs will kill us soon, too.

Acid rain has not "almost destroyed wildlife in the North East". It is placing some fish species in jeopardy -- primarily introduced species like Rainbow-Steelhead (from the west) and Brown trout (from Europe). Native Brook trout have higher resistance, but are seriously threatened by heavy reliance on hatchery fish. Brook trout are not completely resistant by any means, but could be bred to have increased resistance.

Forest species are also threatened by acid rain. Deer and other species are impacted heavily by a multitude of factors.

The advantage of a hot water system is one can store the energy as hot water when the sun isn't shining. You don't have that advantage with direct electric generation systems like solar panels and wind turbines and they can be more annoying than beneficial to the electric grid.

Solar and wind use battery storage, which is one reason for their limitations.

Heated water would have its own storage issues.

There is no "free lunch"

The biggest gains right now are to be had through conservation. That means using less ... of EVERYTHING and really paying attention to the impacts of things we buy and use. There are some surprises. For example, Bananas are actually a lower impact fruit than apples from the US, usually. Why? Because it takes less energy to ship bananas in a boat than to truck apples from Washington to New York or vice versa. OF course, if those apples are grown literally down the street .. . then the picture changes.

[PLAYER57832]

Yes we are going to have to do without a lot of things; the old Hummer, the huge SUV; most people won't need them and those people who do won't have to use them for every day driving. The new people's car is already here, the SMART car gets 30-40 mpg and costs $11,000 which makes it down right affordable in more ways than one.

Try to buy one of those lately? They are not really available.

Also, 30 -40 is chicken change to what we should be getting.

The important thing to remember is we don't have to go cold turkey. If we dropped our consumption in half that in and of itself would be massively significant.

It would help, but at this point, is not enough to stop global warming OR to head off gas shortage issues.

I maintain a very traditionalist viewpoint with regards to wood. Anything made from wood should last as long (or longer) as the age of the tree used to make the product, so when it needs replacement the replacement tree is old enough to be used. The problem with environmental regulations in this regard is that in order to "reforest" cut areas with the prefered fast growing pines, they have to get rid of the slower growing trees because those trees grow faster as saplings than the pine trees.

I agree, to a point on what you say about wood, but you have a lot of information incorrect or dead backwards. That is, there probably are a few plantations here and there that do this, but it is not wide-spread forestry either in the west, the east OR the south.

In reality, the primary forest across the nation were historically conifers. Out east it was White pines, etc. Down south it is a different kind of pine (I'll probably think of it when I sign off here ) our west it is largely Douglas Fir. In all cases, there are a lot of other species, too, but the hardwoods were predominantly undergrowth, according to the experts. (though some disagree)

Remember, the whole idea that ANY tree could be regrown is relatively new. The vast forests of the east were cut before forestry even "began" in earnest. When Gifford Pinchot acquired the Allegheny Forest here in PA, it was nicknamed the "Allegheny Brush patch" because it had been logged stripped for chemical plants, then burned to boot. "Regrow the forest?", people thought, "Ridicilous!!!" Now it is one of the few national forests to actually turn a profit! And, yes, it is largely due to Cherry with Maples and so forth, too.

I won't go on any more, though this is an area I know a LOT about. However, a lot of the cutting in forestry has to do with taxes. Out west, in particular, you are taxed on your timber a "prorated" amount for the "lifetime" of a stand, whether you actually harvest the timber or not.

The defolient used to get this to happen gets into the system. Several years ago I was hunting beat in Maine and I saw a moose who, well frankly, wasn't all there as a moose if you know what I mean. The locals blamed the defolient for his condition.

Defoliant use is highly controversial. I don't like it, but I also don't feel it is necessary to forestry.

One "rule" in most of nature ... you are far better off working WITH what's already there than trying to create something artificial. That, by-the-way is one of the main reasons we need our national parks... to be living museums of biology. For HUMAN benefits!

As for trains puting trucks out business, I'm sorry but the trucks were the ones who nearly put the trains out of business. Their lobby has allowed double trailer trucks to take over the interstate highways, which is one of the reasons why people feel the need to drive big gas guzzling cars. Their drivers blatently disregard any law designed for their safety because their profit margins are so damn low that they have to push themselves to the point of exaustion in order to make a decent living. No I am not sorry for them in the least; especially since they weren't sorry for the engineers the brakemen etc who they caused to be laid off because they killed the railroad freight business.

You misunderstood. They are a HUGE lobby and the train infrastructure is no longer there, in part, because of it.

And as for the perpetual (It's been bull since they raised it up on the old sci fi show Sea Quest DSV and it's bull today) cry to kill all the cows; this is another example of global warming paranoia. It's the same BS that wants us to have every house be a potential EPA disaster recovery site (I kid you not, check up on the EPA regulations for when one of those mini flursent bulbs breaks - it's a mercury contamination disaster zone with every broken bulb)

Again, your slightly misunderstood. I am absolutely in favor of beef. HOWEVER, it does need to be raised in a sustainable manner. What is wrong with much beef agriculture is multitude, but a lot of the problem is about the safety and health of the resulting beef, rather than the impact on global warming and so forth. HOWEVER, that huge tracts of the Amozon were destroyed for farms that were/are not sustainable in the long term (by which time the owners have still made bundles) is true.

As for global warming, whether is true that we can't stop or prevent it, the fact that shit happens all the time and we have to adapt.

Global warming IS fact. We may not be able to completely prevent it, but if we are to survive as a species, we MUST mitigate.

Global warming didn't give us the "dust bowl" in a prior century. Global warming won't be responsible should half of Califorina decide one day (as everyone is telling us) that it wan't to be it's own sub-continent.

Bad agricultural practices DID give us the Dust Bowl! But, as bad as it was, it is nothing to the level of desert encroachment already occuring across the world. Just a 7 degree raise in the world temperature will melt the polar ice cap, stop the jet stream and cause most of north american and Europe to turn to ice.

Volcanoes will still erupt no matter what the temperature,

Ture

tital waves will still form and so on and so forth.

It's "tidal" wave and ... wrong, sort of. Tidal waves are caused by off shore earth quakes, but Tsumanis and Hurricanes, which bring more and greater flooding in many cases, are caused by weather.

We have to be prepared for anything. Even, (gasp) global cooling.

Again, you really show that you don't know much about this subject.

First Global warming will bring cooling to much of the world, particularly Europe, because the Jet Stream will cease. Other events will have similar seemingly illogical impacts.

BUT the real issue is can we adapt? To a point, yes, though it is highly doubtful we will be able to persist with all the amenitities we now take for granted.

I refer to some discussion in another controversial thread. Many, many, many, many people will die if we do not take immediate steps. AND, so far, our government has barely even acknowledged that Global warming is real.

[tzor]

There is no "free lunch"

There may be no "free lunch" but you can make a significant savings brown bagging your lunch as opposed to going to McDinalds every day. In other words every little bit does help.

Back to the solar problem.

Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) is the name given to nine solar power plants in California's Mojave Desert, where insolation is among the best available in the United States. FPL Energy operates and partially owns the plants. The Kramer Junction location receives an average of 340 days of sunshine per year, which makes it an ideal location for solar power generation.

...

The SEGS power plants were commissioned between 1984 and 1991. The facilities have a total of 936,384 mirrors and cover more than 1,600 acres (6.4 km²). Lined up, the parabolic mirrors would cover 229 miles. SEGS VIII (80 MW) and SEGS IX (80 MW) are the largest solar power plants individually and collectively in the world.

Nevada Solar One is the third largest solar power plant in the world, with a nominal capacity of 64 MW and maximum capacity of 75 MW, as of June 2007. The project required an investment of $266 million USD and electricity production is estimated to be 134 million kilowatt hours per year.

It is the second (Arizona Public Service's' Saguaro Solar Facility opened in 2006) solar thermal power plant built in the United States in more than 16 years and the largest STE plant built in the world since 1991. It is on the southeast fringes of Boulder City, Nevada. It was built by Acciona Solar Power (formerly Solargenix), a partially owned subsidiary of Spanish conglomerate Acciona Energy.

...

The plant went online for commercial use on June 27, 2007.[7] It was constructed over a period of 16 months. The total project site is approximately 400 acres (0.6 mi² / 1.6 km²), while the solar collectors cover 300 acres.

Not exactly a free lunch, but it's cheeper than MCD's Coal powered Bic Mac's or Burger King's nuclear powered Whoppers.

[Neoteny]

A better question is when the world will end.

In a few billion years...possibly a few hundred billion. one or the other, though.

Yeah, when that drifting Black Hole gets here, a few hundred billion years.

Wait, what happened to that black hole we were going to create?

The Swiss figured that they would be swallowed up in it as well.

Clever bastards...

[The Weird One]

bump. This was a good debate. What happened?

[tzor]

Yes we are going to have to do without a lot of things; the old Hummer, the huge SUV; most people won't need them and those people who do won't have to use them for every day driving. The new people's car is already here, the SMART car gets 30-40 mpg and costs $11,000 which makes it down right affordable in more ways than one.

Try to buy one of those lately? They are not really available.

Also, 30 -40 is chicken change to what we should be getting.

That depends on the technology. 30-40 is a reasonable range before technology is applied. Technology costs money.

Any system that relies on electricity for partial or full power is going to need good battery technology. The best battery the NiMH battery has been locked awy under Chevron Texaco pattent until 2010 and can only be used for Toyota hybrids. They in turn have only recently built a plant in the US, expected output inso't until 2009. Other companies have delays because of supply of traditional battery arrays.

As for the supply demand of SMART cars, they did a recent article in my regional newspaper. Currently demand is relatively low and thus the supply is not critically short. I think they were talking about a few hundred sold in Long Island, which has a hige population.

You can also go to "old" technology. Old Geo Metros are selling for big bucks. (I wish I hadn't traded in my Geo Metro for my Prius but that's another story.)

The important thing to remember is we don't have to go cold turkey. If we dropped our consumption in half that in and of itself would be massively significant.

It would help, but at this point, is not enough to stop global warming OR to head off gas shortage issues.

We may have to agree to disagree on the Global Warming issue. As fog gas "shortage" this isn't the 1970's. There is no gas shortage and there will not be one for the forseeable future. The problem is the gas price issue, not the shortage issue. As for the price issue, at least in the United States we had beenliving on borrowed time for so long that even this crisis is only a natural correctionfor having an era of cheep gas where the price increses were always way below inflation.

We live, we adjust. At least we are now talkin about raising the price to change our coffee habits.

I maintain a very traditionalist viewpoint with regards to wood. Anything made from wood should last as long (or longer) as the age of the tree used to make the product, so when it needs replacement the replacement tree is old enough to be used. The problem with environmental regulations in this regard is that in order to "reforest" cut areas with the prefered fast growing pines, they have to get rid of the slower growing trees because those trees grow faster as saplings than the pine trees.

I agree, to a point on what you say about wood, but you have a lot of information incorrect or dead backwards. That is, there probably are a few plantations here and there that do this, but it is not wide-spread forestry either in the west, the east OR the south.

Sorry about that, I should have qualified my statement. "Traditional" as in traditional barn builders, not as in typical woodcutters. They only had to cut down a few trees every time they needed a new barn. We've never had good forest management. In the 18th century we deforrested whole areas of New York because the iron ore smelters needed wood for fuel.

[Juan_Bottom]

The title is correct!!!! Wicked is gone!!!!!!

And I JUST sent in my premium too!!!!!!!!! I think I'm just gonna ask for a refund.

[DaGip]

The title is correct!!!! Wicked is gone!!!!!!

And I JUST sent in my premium too!!!!!!!!! I think I'm just gonna ask for a refund.

Wicked being gone isn't that bad, I know lots of people that are thrilled to see her leave...sorry, I have to disagree on this one...it is most definitely NOT the end of the world.

[Juan_Bottom]

The title is correct!!!! Wicked is gone!!!!!!

And I JUST sent in my premium too!!!!!!!!! I think I'm just gonna ask for a refund.

Wicked being gone isn't that bad, I know lots of people that are thrilled to see her leave...sorry, I have to disagree on this one...it is most definitely NOT the end of the world.

*middle finger key* I'm looking out for my own man. I'd be fussin' if you were kicked around too.

I did accept my prem though...... I'm trying to be a responsible, emotionless leader. Not unlike Putin was.