how to reduce climate change

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > how to reduce climate change

how to reduce climate change10-05-2018 00:39
connor45 ☆☆☆☆☆ (1)	there are many ways to reduce climate change. first is to reuse plastic bottles as well as coffee cup (or bring you own as some coffee store do offer discounts for doing this see store website or ask just in case) a bigger way to reduce climate change as well as slowing it is to plant trees. a great way to use this way is to plant at least two tree for every tree cut down. and create plots of land where trees are protected. other ways are to create a levy or charge on large companies using fossils fuels to influence them to use greener, cleaner fuels such as solar or wind. on the subject of cleaner fuel, electric cars shoud be developed more to rival traditional petrol (gas etc.) or diesel vehicles and governments who have not planned to phase out traditional cars should(the united kingdom has planned by 2040 or something like that as far as I know)
10-05-2018 01:14
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	connor45 wrote: there are many ways to reduce climate change. Define 'climate change' without using circular definitions. There is no need to reduce a meaningless buzzword. connor45 wrote: first is to reuse plastic bottles Don't like bottled water? You could always get it out of the tap like we used to do. Oh...wait...we still do. Bottled water is tap water. connor45 wrote: as well as coffee cup (or bring you own as some coffee store do offer discounts for doing this see store website or ask just in case) Paper and styrofoam do not cause the Earth to warm. connor45 wrote: a bigger way to reduce climate change as well as slowing it is to plant trees. Guess what? We already do! We have more trees in the United States than we've ever had. You can thank tree farmers like Weyerhaeuser and Georgia-Pacific for that one! connor45 wrote: a great way to use this way is to plant at least two tree for every tree cut down. That plant more than two! They plant several, and thin them as they grow. connor45 wrote: and create plots of land where trees are protected. They ARE protected, by the farmers themselves. We also have protection sections of our national forests where no logging ever occurs. connor45 wrote: other ways are to create a levy or charge on large companies Why? What did they do? Why punish a successful company for simply being successful? connor45 wrote: using fossils fuels Fossils don't burn. We don't use them for fuel. If you want to "stick it to 'em" for using oil and natural gas fuels, then YOU should get 'stuck' too. It's only fair. Punish you for buying any car (including electric ones), using the bus, train, or aircraft. Punish you for shipping stuff from Amazon and other suppliers such as your local grocery store. connor45 wrote: to influence them to use greener, cleaner fuels such as solar or wind. Solar power and wind power are piddle power. They are EXPENSIVE to produce the same power. ALL of the wind farms and solar farms in Washington State, for example, do not even come close to a SINGLE natural gas fired power plant. connor45 wrote: on the subject of cleaner fuel, Acres of dangerous wind turbines and blights of acres of solar panels is 'clean'??? How do these forms of power even survive without someone in the government taking money from me by force (taxes) to fund these? connor45 wrote: electric cars shoud be developed more You mean those coal-fired vehicles? Where do you think the electricity for that car comes from? connor45 wrote: to rival traditional petrol (gas etc.) or diesel vehicles There is nothing wrong with gas or oil. They are efficient ways to package energy. connor45 wrote: and governments who have not planned to phase out traditional cars should Why should government tell ANYONE what they will drive? Who is the government to FORCE people into a particular model car? You are not the dictator here, dude. connor45 wrote: (the united kingdom has planned by 2040 or something like that as far as I know) You are not the dictator of the UK either. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
10-05-2018 01:14
Jeffvw ★☆☆☆☆ (84)	connor45 wrote: there are many ways to reduce climate change. first is to reuse plastic bottles as well as coffee cup (or bring you own as some coffee store do offer discounts for doing this see store website or ask just in case) How will reusing plastic bottles and coffee cups reduce climate change? I can see how it would reduce litter. connor45 wrote:a bigger way to reduce climate change as well as slowing it is to plant trees. a great way to use this way is to plant at least two tree for every tree cut down. and create plots of land where trees are protected. Planting trees is a good idea. connor45 wrote:other ways are to create a levy or charge on large companies using fossils fuels to influence them to use greener, cleaner fuels such as solar or wind. So you are suggesting making things more expensive to make a nearly unmeasurable impact on climate change? This mainly hurts poor people. You may not be aware of how much CO2 it takes have any impact on global temperatures. According to the theory, if the US were to completely stop all CO2 emissions for the next 50 years, we would prevent a 0.18 C increase in temperature. In other words, even a complete stop to all CO2 emissions has almost no impact on temperature. There is also the fact that solar and wind require 100% backup from natural gas, so you end up with more expensive energy with almost no reduction in CO2. connor45 wrote:on the subject of cleaner fuel, electric cars shoud be developed more to rival traditional petrol (gas etc.) or diesel vehicles and governments who have not planned to phase out traditional cars should(the united kingdom has planned by 2040 or something like that as far as I know) Electric cars are cool, but we should not be forced to buy them. They will not save the world, but one day will be more economical than gas cars. One last question. Why do people think that a warmer climate is bad? We used to call warm periods 'climate optimums' since life thrives during warm times. Are we afraid that farmers will have less vacation time due to longer growing seasons? According to greenhouse theory, only the poles, winters and nights will get warmer and the summer days and the tropics will see almost no change.
10-05-2018 01:24
monckton★★★☆☆ (436)	Carl Sagan on Climate as an Emerging Issue (1990) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZbZ5RvW_qI
10-05-2018 02:00
Jeffvw ★☆☆☆☆ (84)	monckton wrote: Carl Sagan on Climate as an Emerging Issue (1990) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZbZ5RvW_qI Sagan's predictions were wrong. In science that means that the theory was wrong. The Midwest is not turning into a scrub desert and sea level rise is not accelerating. Edited on 10-05-2018 02:05

10-05-2018 02:31
Wake ★★★★★ (4034)	connor45 wrote: there are many ways to reduce climate change. first is to reuse plastic bottles as well as coffee cup (or bring you own as some coffee store do offer discounts for doing this see store website or ask just in case) a bigger way to reduce climate change as well as slowing it is to plant trees. a great way to use this way is to plant at least two tree for every tree cut down. and create plots of land where trees are protected. other ways are to create a levy or charge on large companies using fossils fuels to influence them to use greener, cleaner fuels such as solar or wind. on the subject of cleaner fuel, electric cars shoud be developed more to rival traditional petrol (gas etc.) or diesel vehicles and governments who have not planned to phase out traditional cars should(the united kingdom has planned by 2040 or something like that as far as I know) Connor - firstly THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CLIMATE CHANGE! That was a nightmare thought up by "environmentalists" who believe that man is responsible for anything and everything that happens on this entire planet. They believe that this planet would be better off without humans on it. Except for themselves of course. They HATE the populations of the third world countries and every thing they do is to kill them off. The ACTIONS that these people really want would be to cut off using fossil fuels which would kill more than 100,000,000 human beings in the third world countries. Without ready and available energy you could not heat or cool people. You could not farm food in volumes that feed the Earth's populations. You could not house them or protect them from natural disasters. This isn't some pidley ass high school quiz as you seem to think it is. CO2 is NOTHING. After atmospheric contents of between 200 and 250 parts per million it has no further effect on the heating in the atmosphere and this was plainly stated by the US Geological Society 100 years ago. There NEVER was "97% of all scientists agree" - it was .02% who agreed and most of them because it allowed them to get government grants for research. And most of this research had nothing whatsoever to do with real global warming research. The real "greenhouse gas" is nothing more than water in it's three phases - solid, liquid and gaseous. And since this planet is 70% covered in water, man is not going to effect than in any manner whatsoever. How does this REALLY operate? While extremely complicated you can use short hand - the Sun radiates energy towards the Earth. About HALF of that gets through the atmosphere and shows upon the Earth. This absorption means that high frequency energy (light) is reduced to a low frequency energy - lower Infrared. Because the air above the ground is cooler the IR radiates into the atmosphere. This is absorbed by H20 which converts the radiation, which travels at the speed of light, into conduction which is a mechanical energy moving very slowly. So slowly that on a hot day if you look down close to the ground you can see a shimmering. In general this conductive energy moves slower than that because few days have temperature differences between the Earth and the atmosphere that large. The conduction of this thermal energy causes the air to expand and rise. This in turn causes the higher levels which have cooled to fall - this is convection. This is how thermal energy is moved from the time it is absorbed from Sunlight to the time it reaches the stratosphere whereupon another means of thermal energy movement occurs. But that has nothing to do with climate change. Virtually every competent scientist in the world knows there is no man-made climate change. This is now a project led by politicians who see this as a means to gain and retain power. Virtually everything that real politicians do today is grasp for more and yet more power. Not one of them cares one wit for you or anything else. They know there is no AGW but they know that it is a useful tool. So let's not hear anymore about how paper is good and Styrofoam is bad. That huge floating island of plastic in the Pacific? It is the Pacific's version of the Atlantic's Sargasso Sea - currents that push everything towards the center of the North-westerlies and the Trade Winds. This contains ONE measurable piece of plastic (mostly tiny bits almost invisible) per cubic meter. The large clumps are from garbage scows from Asian countries before they break up. Man is small and the oceans are huge. You have been used by teachers and politicians. And these were used by people like Dr. Michael Mann who so HAD to make a name for himself that he was willing to invent global warming almost single-handed. But not only is he a total oaf, but we have the emails of him plotting with his co-researchers to "fix" the data since the warming he predicted never occurred. And then when someone actually said he was a liar out loud he sued them. And he lost the suit last year and is about to be more than taken care of. Don't be the tool that the politicians and "environmentalists" think you are. Don't allow jackasses like California Governor Jerry Brown to dig tunnels from northern to southern California to pump more water south and continue wild-eyed population growth in the LA Basin. Who do you suppose is paying him off for that? As I stated in the first part of this posting - there IS no global warming. There IS no "climate change". God and/or Mother Nature do it all by themselves without even some assistance from man.
RE: reduction of climate change11-05-2018 03:37
Eric Crews ☆☆☆☆☆ (12)	https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home
11-05-2018 04:29
Wake ★★★★★ (4034)	Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented.
11-05-2018 05:29
Eric Crews ☆☆☆☆☆ (12)	Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's a simple design please do examine it.. thank you
11-05-2018 06:08
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's amazing that people still fall for this stuff. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2018 06:09
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	Eric Crews wrote: Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's a simple design please do examine it.. thank you Sorry dude, perpetual motion is not possible. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2018 06:26
Eric Crews ☆☆☆☆☆ (12)	Into the Night wrote: Eric Crews wrote: Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's a simple design please do examine it.. thank you Sorry dude, perpetual motion is not possible. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Sir the system is not not a heat cycle,,,,
11-05-2018 07:14
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	Eric Crews wrote: Into the Night wrote: Eric Crews wrote: Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's a simple design please do examine it.. thank you Sorry dude, perpetual motion is not possible. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Sir the system is not not a heat cycle,,,, Actually it is. Compressing a gas is a heat cycle. So is letting its pressure go again. Moving hydraulic fluids is also a heat cycle. It takes energy to get it moving and energy is dissipated to stop it. In both cases, losses due to friction is heat. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2018 09:15
Tim the plumber ★★★★☆ (1356)	Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home This impossible. I expect it to be virus bait.
11-05-2018 16:11
Wake ★★★★★ (4034)	Eric Crews wrote: Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's a simple design please do examine it.. thank you Not that it needs examination but I did look at it. Someone has a very serious lack of education concerning "force" and how forces require energy to act. Or you can simply reply by quoting the laws of thermodynamics.

11-05-2018 17:24
Eric Crews ☆☆☆☆☆ (12)	Into the Night wrote: Eric Crews wrote: Into the Night wrote: Eric Crews wrote: Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's a simple design please do examine it.. thank you Sorry dude, perpetual motion is not possible. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Sir the system is not not a heat cycle,,,, Actually it is. Compressing a gas is a heat cycle. So is letting its pressure go again. Moving hydraulic fluids is also a heat cycle. It takes energy to get it moving and energy is dissipated to stop it. In both cases, losses due to friction is heat. The design is a pressure differentiation engine/ generator system with the addition of the forward advance of magnetic pressure atop the fluid velocity rate in tandem with the reintroduction of produced electricity to then allow for speed incline and a "baug" resistant power ban allowing excess available electricity.
11-05-2018 17:26
Eric Crews ☆☆☆☆☆ (12)	Tim the plumber wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home This impossible. I expect it to be virus bait. it;s not bait review the flow cycles here's another one http://www.designdeskinc.com/cross-pump-generator.html
11-05-2018 17:34
Wake ★★★★★ (4034)	Eric Crews wrote: Into the Night wrote: Eric Crews wrote: Into the Night wrote: Eric Crews wrote: Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's a simple design please do examine it.. thank you Sorry dude, perpetual motion is not possible. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Sir the system is not not a heat cycle,,,, Actually it is. Compressing a gas is a heat cycle. So is letting its pressure go again. Moving hydraulic fluids is also a heat cycle. It takes energy to get it moving and energy is dissipated to stop it. In both cases, losses due to friction is heat. The design is a pressure differentiation engine/ generator system with the addition of the forward advance of magnetic pressure atop the fluid velocity rate in tandem with the reintroduction of produced electricity to then allow for speed incline and a "baug" resistant power ban allowing excess available electricity. OK, then where is the working model? You have just written total rubbish and it seems pretty plain that you're the copyright holder.
11-05-2018 17:43
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	Eric Crews wrote: Into the Night wrote: Eric Crews wrote: Into the Night wrote: Eric Crews wrote: Wake wrote: Eric Crews wrote: https://sites.google.com/baxtermotorcompany.com/baxtermotorcompanycom/home We all know that perpetual-motion machines have been all the rage since global warming was invented. It's a simple design please do examine it.. thank you Sorry dude, perpetual motion is not possible. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Sir the system is not not a heat cycle,,,, Actually it is. Compressing a gas is a heat cycle. So is letting its pressure go again. Moving hydraulic fluids is also a heat cycle. It takes energy to get it moving and energy is dissipated to stop it. In both cases, losses due to friction is heat. The design is a pressure differentiation engine/ generator system with the addition of the forward advance of magnetic pressure atop the fluid velocity rate in tandem with the reintroduction of produced electricity to then allow for speed incline and a "baug" resistant power ban allowing excess available electricity. Whatever buzzwords you use, it comes down to friction and heat. You might start your next design by actually applying the laws of thermodynamics. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

Join the debate how to reduce climate change:

Threads	Replies	Last post
COULD MOON DUST HELP REDUCE GLOBAL TEMPERATURES?	32	16-10-2023 19:36
Blocking out the Sun, to reduce global warming...	4	27-04-2021 21:24
Burning fossil fuel reduce O2 and increase CO2 and CO2 is a cooling gas so why	4	20-06-2019 06:30
So what if Democrats spend 500 trillion USD to reduce CO2 while China builds 100 warships	0	30-04-2019 15:37
Even if Democrats spend 100 trillion dollars and reduce CO2 in air to 100 ppm temperature won't chang	1	24-04-2019 21:42