 |
Dry water a reality that could save world from global warming, say scientists | News.com.au
There may be an answer and you could say it's been under our feet all the time the answer is dry water or as it is better known; sand. Instantly the Sahara takes on some useful properties and great investment potential.
Okay so it's not April 1st, I checked after reading this one but it looks like we have found a reason for business as usual, I knew we could do it.
And what do they really think they are going to do with the stuff after it absorbs the co2's so plants can't breath anymore?
Let's not get ahead of ourselves here, but no doubt plants will grow in it, perhaps releasing the CO2. I expect there was a reason why the idea didn't go anywhere when the stuff was discovered and we don't have the details on how to get the CO2 into it which might be more expensive than it is worth. I expect it will be used in scrubbers on power stations and given the quantity needed will wind up with a similar use to fly ash.Quote:
Originally Posted by califdadof3
I just thought it amusing that such a common substance might be a solution when everyone is focused on very expensive solutions. The problems we have with CO2 isn't the naturally occurring plant food but the unnatural release of CO2 locked up in Coal and Oil/gas
There's a difference? One Carbon, two Oxygen. Chem 101 was a while back, but I don't remember molecular isotopes.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
The difference lies in the excesses associated with our industries and lifestyleQuote:
Originally Posted by Catsmine
You see Cats... if we were nuckle dragging cavemen we would not be emitting CO2 unnaturally . Our technology is evil.. so sayeth the Luddites .
Well Tom It's nice to know you admit you are knuckle dragging cavemen who are using outmoded technologies such as burning stuff to get energyQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
That would imply that there is an effective replacement readily available ?Quote:
outmoded technologies
HEMISPHERIC TIMING SHOWS OCEANS ARE SOURCE OF CO2, BY: DENNIS T. AVERY : Center for Global Food IssuesQuote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
According to This research:
Quote:
The seasonal variations in CO2 and the lack of time delays between the hemispheres suggest fossil-fuel-derived CO2 is almost totally absorbed locally in the year it is emitted,
Thus far I believe wind produces about 2 percent of our energy needs. How many of those windmills that rich liberals don't want blocking their view will it take to bump that up considerably, how much land will it consume and how many more millions of miles of ugly transmission lines will be required?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
So cats you have joined those of us who say CO2 isn't the source of global warming and isn't the pollutant it is made out to be.
The source of ALL warming on this "globe" is about 93 million miles from here. It's a G-0 fusion reaction called Sol.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Yes Cats, I agree, but we have to consider the implications of that on our political systems. We have been mightly conned so what must we do with those who have fallen for the ploy, Where I came from those who believe as I do have almost succeeded in throwing the believers out of office and interestingly global warming didn't rate a mention in the campaign
It's happening. Cr@p and trade did not make it through the Senate .Those who passed it in the House of Representatives are going to feel the wrath . The enviro-wacko Barbara Hindenburg Boxer is going to lose what was once a safe Democrat Senate seat for her complicity in turning some of the most fertile farm land in the nation into a dust bowl to save a minnow .
The problem is we have to put up with Barack 'Clark Griswold' Obama for another 2 and 1/2 years.
Got to play a theme song here:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
YouTube - Holiday Road - Lindsey Buckingham
'This is no longer a vacation. It's a quest. It's a quest for fun. I'm gonna have fun and you're gonna have fun. We're all gonna have so much .... fun we'll need plastic surgeory to remove our .....smiles"
That's two Senates it didn't make it through Tom could it be that people and perhaps politicians are becoming smarter and we are not going to continue to swallow the compost the green lobby has been burying us in?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The problem is the remaining time the President has. He could do what Clintoon did after 2004 and latch on to the Republican agenda and perhaps salvage a 2nd term.
But POTUS cannot change direction on taxes ,healthcare(even though Waxman is making major changes to the law already passed completely under the radar of the American public.. thanks to the intentional inattention by the cheer leading media) and cap and tax without admitting to major mistakes in the last two years of major legislation passed by all Democratic votes.
What the President does have in his back pocket is the threat of an executive order. SCOTUS gave him the opening by calling CO2 a pollutant. The EPA can be directed by POTUS to regulate this "pollutant" .He has threatened to do so.
Tom I wonder just how fickle the public is in your neck of the woods. We have a pecular development here it appears that the government was thrown out of office for not taking action on climate change (cap n trade) yet those who will take office are mainly those opposed to taking action because they don't believe the science. Now if that trend is mirrored across the pond we could expect your Democrats to lose, couldn't we, because they have failed to take action, whatever the reason
Hello:
Wondering whether burning fossil fuel causes global warming, or NOT, is like wondering whether the hammer will break while you're beating yourself on the head with it...
excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:27 AM. |