The End of the World is Near, Unless We Follow My Well-Thought Out Plan

[Dems Will Win]

Are we doomed? If global warming continues, and the methane-heavy peat bogs in Russia and Canada melt, in turn melting some methane deposits on the ocean bottom, the temperature of the Earth would soar 30 degrees Celsius, as it did during the Permian Extinction, when 95% of all species died out.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=227

So we have to stop global warming. Now. It's the biggest emergency in the history of the world, bigger than WWII and we have to accept this inconvenient truth.

Gore had it right in his movie when he showed how to address the crisis. Conservation, wind and solar power, more hydroelectric and switch to electric cars everywhere.

Up until now, Gore's plan has its heart in the right place but given the state of technology in 2005, the economics for renewables, except for wind, just weren't there. Unless the government made you do it with credits and subsidies.

But that was 2005. Now it's 2006 and suddenly everything has changed.

Why? Because there have recently been several great new energy inventions announced and they solve everything--if we play our cards right from this moment on.



#1 The Tesla Electric Car - Burn Rubber, Not Gasoline: Designed, Built and tested by Silicon Valley billionaires and Venture Capitalists, Tesla Motors has a 21st Century sportscar that goes 135 mph, 0 to 60 in 4 seconds (!), and gets 250 miles to the 3 1/2 hour charge off of 6,138 LAPTOP BATTERIES. If everyone gets the sedan version of this electric breakthrough and charges at night, 85% of all passenger miles in the US could be replaced with nighttime base load energy that is there anyhow. This means we wouldn't have to build extra plants or burn extra fuel to charge the whole fleet (there is 30% extra off-peak capacity in most regions, except maybe Southern CA).



#2 Tidal Power - There are now companies starting to field-test new powerful tidal power machines that rest on the ocean floor and work like wind turbines. The blades can be geared so they move slowly and still make lots of energy--so fish are not killed by the devices.





#3 Wind Power Breakthrough - Clipper Wind now has a 16-gear turbine that has its own crane built into the tower for much cheaper maintenance. The blades are geared so they move slowly and still make lots of energy--so birds can not killed by the devices. These are 25% more efficient and can economically be placed in medium wind areas.



#4 Concentrating Photovoltaics - One company is now out of R&D and will be producing in volume soon. They use a lens and optics system to concentrate 400 Suns on a special multi-junction chip. Rather than 11% efficiency, as with silicon panels, the device get 40%. Huge solar farms will soon be contracted out for this technology, which will quickly dominate the solar industry as it does not use silicon waste, of which there is a shortage right now. THe old obsolete silicon panels need 5 acres to make a Megawatt, CPV at 40% only needs 1 acre, 80% less land!


#5 Neighborhood Conservation Drives - Using Community Development techniques with block parties and regional newspapers, neighborhoods are organized to get everyone to pitch in, conserve and save the planet. This can produce 20% reductions in electricity and water usage very quickly and it is sustainable.

Welcome to the Future.

The new Global Climate Stabilization Plan:

#1 All world leaders declare a state of emergency in energy use and work together to gear up and manufacture the above breakthroughs and others on a war footing. Rationing would have to be implemented if people don't change their ways and conserve.

#2 Deploy Breakthrough Technology Over The Next 15 Years - 300 GW of CPV solar farms, 400 GW of mini-hydro and retrofitting dams, 150 GW of wind power, 100 GW of tidal power and ban production of new fossil-fuel Internal Combustion Engines because of the Climate Emergency Declaration, switching to the electric car. Trucks and tractors can run on bio-diesel, while jets will have to burn hydrogen. All of these technologies now exist and need only to be manufactured in volume. The 950 total GW is more than current US installed capacity and will stabilize and then reduce carbon. In the following 15 years, 400 GW of CPV, 200 GW of tidal and another 200 GW of wind, so add another 800 GW to account for all new energy use by the world. There would not be much more hydro sites left to install, so that would not happen in the second 15 years.

#3 Seed Stratosphere with Sulfur Particles to Buy Extra Time and Cool The Earth This strategy, from the leading atmospheric scientist Paul Crutzen, costs $25 billion to $50 billion and immediately cools the Earth by a half-degree Celsius for 2-3 years by reflecting sunlight and thus heat. Repeat if necessary.

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/84/i32/8432cooling.html

That's the plan. Simple. 1-2-3.

Let's get a movement together that demands this start to happen immediately so it becomes a real political issue. The GOP can't win this one after Katrina and now the rapidly melting ice sheets--and especially they can't win because the economics suddenly--in 2006--favor renewables.

Oh and btw, nukes are useless in a globally warming world because of drought--which reduces the cool river water until the plants have to shut down, as they are now doing in Europe and soon in the Midwest. So nukes can never be part of the solution to global warming. Since the drought of July of 2006, we now know that nukes are just good money after bad.

Some links:

http://www.teslamotors.com
http://www.clipperwind.com
http://www.pyronsolar.com
http://www.lunarenergy.co.uk

Please remember to recommend if you want to try and save Spaceship Earth. If you want to see this planet fry, forget about it...

[RebelOne]

1. Actually, I am not going to worry about it now.

The end of the world won't happen in my lifetime. I'll let my grand kids save the world.

[Dems Will Win]

3. Sorry it will be too late, according to the top US climate

modeller, James Hansen, we only have 10 years to stabilize carbon and stop the Earth from warming another degree. The new info is from realizing that there are these enormous peat bogs that would melt across Russia and Canada. In fact, the temperature in the more southern bogs are already approaching the melting point!

[NYdemocrat089]

6. Please tell me you were being sarcastic.

As a 16 (almost 17) year old, I am very worried about the future of our planet. I don't appreciate today's adults placing the job of fixing this mess on my generation's shoulders.

[Quantess]

42. Here ya go kid.

We rode it hard and put it away wet. Life on Earth sure was great! We had fun partying and trashing it.

Cheer up, kid, you can fix 'er up as good as new! Just a few scrapes here an' there....
Better yet, someday you'll have kids and they can fix it.:sarcasm:

[rosesaylavee]

84. We don't all think that way.

Obviously, not an informed person.

[Deja Q]

86. Find and watch 'All in the Family' episode entitled "Gloria's Shock"

There are some shocking statistics about the environment and population...

Pity nobody did a thing back then either... except add to the population.

[SmokingJacket]

38. We have to start now, anyway.

The science of tomorrow will be built on the discoveries and inventions of today...

And the sooner we can slow down the mess we're in, the less impossible it will be to turn it around.

[Dems Will Win]

40. SPOCK: "It's only logical Captain..."

Thanks for that. Obviously the miners and drillers who own society want to continue selling us fossil fuel so they are not going to help--we have to do it.

[AntiFascist]

81. Not only are many of them not going to help....

they will likely try to profit by attempting to prevent it from happening anytime soon. Those who monopolize energy feel that they can literally rule the world, advertising their twisted religious beliefs as justification.

[NMMNG]

79. Spoken like a true Republican

x(

[Toots]

88. Spoken like a Republican

:shrug: I guess even a few Liberals are uncaring although it goes against everything Liberalism stands for..

[jpak]

115. Your grandkids will not want to save the world we made for them

or worse, they may not have a world to save...

[greenman3610]

2. rock on my brother

pessimism at this point is a luxury that only
sophomore philosophy majors and tenured professors can afford.

[Dems Will Win]

5. How true, we need action, not whining.

[Octafish]

36. Lots of employment opportunities there, too.

JFK ordered NASA to do the impossible: Get Americans to the moon and back and we did it.

Imagine what else we could do if we wanted to?

Solve the energy crisis.

End poverty.

World peace.

But, we know what happened.

[Junkdrawer]

4. K&R...Excellent plank for the 2008 Gore campaign...n/t

[Junkdrawer]

8. PS. I am skeptical of the sulfur seeding idea. That should be used...

as a "last option" and then only if it's studied extensively.

[NV Whino]

12. Me too.

I think this one will just create more problems later.

[Dems Will Win]

13. I agree. The trick is manufacturing capacity of the new

breakthrough technologies above. We won't be able to manufacture enough machines to do it in time (likely). So we need the sulfur idea. It should be studied thoroughly and monitored but I don't see how we have enough time to manufacture the solutions without it.

It will eat up some ozone and cause some acid rain--but as you lower the use of fossil fuels you are also radically reducing acid rain.

[Surya Gayatri]

78. K & R - Wonderful OP...

yes, studies of all international bodies have confirmed the same phenomenon, especially regarding the education of women. There is a direct & universal correlation between rising education levels & smaller family sizes. The planet will be saved for future generations only if the limitless talent of women is tapped. SG

on edit: Sorry, this was originally meant to reply to post #23!

[mom cat]

93. The oceans are already becoming too acidicdue to the co2 in the

atmosphere which is absorbed into the water. Adding more acid might just push the oceans past their tipping point. As for the other suggestions, we should be on them yesterday. Thanks for the excellent post. I think that this could be the foundation for a Climate Change Action Forum.

[FogerRox]

72. How do you get the sulfur in the stratosphere?

Rockets? HOw many rockets? How many launches per year? Size of infrastructure ($$$) to do the job?

How many tons of sulfur per year have to go up? For how many years?

I think you might be getting my drift.

[pooja]

92. They are doing it in China already.

[muriel_volestrangler]

101. Link? (n/t)

[Dems Will Win]

114. Super Artillery guns have been proposed.

Not a problem to make one.

[mopinko]

100. this is well understood, since

it is based on data from volcanoes. well known, well understood. i say do this NOW.

[FogerRox]

120. I understand that

AS soon as one starts to compute the TONS of Sulfur required... and the height required....35k ft to 110k ft? You have a massive undertaking. And once you start, you are committed to keep it up until the Co2 drops, otherwise you risk a CO2 rebound.

And dont we end up with Sulfuric acid rain? Which is another problem. The PH of rain used to be 6.6 in the 1950's. By 1975 it was down to 5.6. IN PA, in -IIRC 1989- they set a county record of 4.3.

Heres the problem: Nitrogen is not water soluable at around 5.3 and below. Just how do you propose to get a vital plant....
like corn....

to take up an essential nutrient like nitrogen.... when the "N" is chemically bonded to soil particles.

Rain with a PH of below, say, 4.8 will not sustain plant life. go a little further... the water you drink will contain heavy metals like Cadium, Mercury, Aluminum. At that point we are all dead.

[Dems Will Win]

119. Can you get it to Gore?

[Joe Bacon]

7. Why it doesn't matter since Glenn Beck says the Rapture will happen 8/22

Yep, THE GREAT FLOAT OFF® will occur on Tuesday. Be prepared to say goodbye to all the rich white christian Republicans!

[Dems Will Win]

20. Can I have Beck's car after the Rapture?

I want to sledgehammer it and then bury it....

[Joe Bacon]

24. I'm waiting for those Beverly Hills real estate bargains!

I got my eyes on Oral Roberts estate when he floats off on Tuesday, although Billy Graham's will be my second choice!

[Dems Will Win]

26. Cindy Sheehan Could Get Crawford Ranch for a Song

An anti-war song....

[ima_sinnic]

52. hallelujah, thank you jeezus!! and what a party that will be

for those so "cruelly" Left Behind ;)

[NYdemocrat089]

9. K&R

:hi:

[earth mom]

10. Excellent Post! Recommended! nt

[JohnnyRingo]

11. Great post...Well researched and composed

Very interesting read

[Dems Will Win]

14. Thanks!

[Gregorian]

15. This entire thread is missing the single most important subject.

Population.

Immediate solutions are important. Solar collection, etc. However, even if we double our efficiency, which is not going to happen easily, if at all, if we then double our population, we are suddenly right back in the same position we are in now. But with no way out.

I know. It's a sin to even mention the word. Go ahead and tell me how it's not a problem, or how you have kids and which one of them should be eliminated. And that was on this forum, of all places. I've heard it all. I am not advocating eliminating people. I only ask that we begin the discussion of population. The true problem is not just burning petroleum, but how much petroleum is burning. And there lies the key to this issue. How much. The answer to that question is the numbers. Six billion people can in an extremely short period of time turn into a much larger number.

Are we going to ignore the most important part of this equation?

[halobeam]

21. I was thinking of this just yesterday...

I've read so many articles about this... including ones with nature restoring itself regarding population control by way of natural diseases, it seems everything can heal naturally, and sometimes it's at such a great scale and of course a threat to so many human lives.

The responsible decision by each individual (not by govt) should be consideration of having children/and or minimizing how many, plus adoption of who is here already and in such need of love and nurturing... just think of every couple that is ready to begin a family, adopts one first, then has their own, how many children would be cared for! and one less new person on the earth/per family would make a nice dent in population problems.

There isn't just one answer in my opinion, but educating the public is first. Most people don't understand that each individual CAN make a difference in what they do AS A COLLECTIVE. It's Gore's argument re: global warming.. you can just unplug your unused appliances, and if EVERYONE did that, it would reduce MASSIVE amounts of CO2 into our atmosphere. My 11 yr old does this as a chore at night. He thought he was too young and helpless to do ANYTHING about global warming... now he knows better than that... on top of talking about it with his friends, which he can also do, to further awareness of how HELPFUL children can be right now about this crisis.

Thanks for bringing this up... I did think this thread would explode in conversation about this issue.. I'm disappointed to see it hasn't... maybe a new thread for this?

[Dems Will Win]

23. The key to birth control is education

The more education, the lower the birth rate or it even goes negative. So we just need to deliver a new global education to the Third World. And it should be a progressive curriculum and teach renewable energy and "regenerative science".

Exactly how do we do that?

I'll explain how in another thread on my plan for a new global education site...

[Surya Gayatri]

80. Thanks for a fantastic post, Dems...

please see post #78, where I meant to reply to this one. You're doin' a heck'ov a job on the research! SG

[Amonester]

83. Good points (plus: to bookmark, kick & nominate this thread).

Just one small thing I want to say about "adopts one first" (which I am not against) for I want to emphasize the fact that my own father was adopted when he was too young to remember, and he was a relatively happy guy until the day he got an argument at age nineteen and "they" told him they weren't his "real" parents.

He told me he felt so bad from that precise moment that all he wanted from that point on was to kill himself: he didn't do it, of course, except that he volunteered to the AF thinking, "if the plane I'm in gets shot down by the Nazis, I'd be happy my life would end..." Plenty of his friends died like that, but "unfortunately" (his words), he made it back without a scratch...

The point is: Never tell adopted children they are "adopted" because, that's too "life-breaking" for too many.

Better not tell things that can really hurt badly.
Keep them "secret."

[pooja]

95. Works really well, unless, of course, a white family adopts an African

baby? I think the child would question his/ her origination eventually.

[Amonester]

98. True. So in those cases, it would be better to...

start telling the truth ("softly") to the children from an early age on, as for them not to make a "big fuss" out of knowing "their real parents" aren't "to be found" ever again. Still, many children might feel some kind of "losses" deep down inside anyway.

It's not an "easy" subject to deal with for many people. They often think and hope they will be able to "find" their real parents one day. For many of them, they'll never find them and it could break their heart their whole life through.

[bananas]

25. It's been leveling off, projected to stabilize around 10 billion.

We stopped exponential population growth a long time ago.
There are plenty of sustainable renewable resources for 10 billion.

[Bushwick Bill]

55. Really?

I wouldn't doubt if lack of fossil fuels fails to allow this planet to get there, but I hadn't heard this. Have you ever seen this lecture? It is apparently the gold standard discussion of exponential growth in a finite world.
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/lectures/461

[bananas]

67. Yes, really.

I haven't seen that lecture, I'll look at it later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population

[mom cat]

97. I wonder if there really are enough sustainable resources for

10 billion people. Water and agricultural land are becoming dwindling resources and as climate change increases, deserts will expand creating even more of a squeeze. I think that the country with the greatest population problem is the US because our population has become so high maintain ce and and wasteful of both renewable and non renewable resources.
We should be leading the world by reducing our own population and thereby encourage other people to follow.
When I had my only child, the population of the world was 3 billion. I took several trips to India and saw the horrors of severe overpopulation and poverty. Although the poverty is more due to European exploitation, the population problem is both cultural and the side effect of vaccines. Modern medicine has greatly limited childhood death, but birth rates have not adjusted to fully compensate for the fact.
If a new standard of no more than one biological birth per family (making allowances for normally occurring multiple births), we could cut the population and give mother earth some breathing room.
Those of us who care about the earth can lead the way with Earth friendly lifestyle changes, both in our population decisions and in our consumption choices.

[SmokingJacket]

41. Do you have any good ideas?

Population has been an issue for years -- more so in the seventies than now, though.

Eliminating poverty is one way to go about it -- you'll notice that wealthier countries have fewer kids. The birth rate in Sweden is 11 per thousand, which is the same as its death rate. Mali, on the other hand, has a birth rate of 49 per thousand and a death rate of almost 17.

Of course, making birth control easy and accessible should also be a major priority.

Imposing limits on how many children people in third-world countries can have is not the ideal solution, in my opinion.

[Bushwick Bill]

53. Bingo.

Great essay here on this.
http://www.energybulletin.net/15480.html

I also find these sites frightening.
http://www.eroei.com/solutions/population.html
http://www.dieoff.org/

[EVDebs]

16. Don't forget to go local in your currencies

Local currency source info at Ithaca Hours
http://www.ithacahours.com/

De-fund 'globalization' and the Wal-Marting of the world and act locally.

[Subdivisions]

17. Very, VERY..nice! Good job!

And, that is one BEAUTIFUL car! Is there one with a hemi?

[Dems Will Win]

28. They'll have a sedan in 2008 that will be affordable

Did I mention that red beauty runs on 1 CENT A MILE? I think I forgot that...

What do you pay per mile for gas in your 20th Century car?

[LWolf]

18. For more rural folks like myself,

I need an electric tractor. I also need an electric truck that can haul livestock, at least 5 tons of hay, etc.. I also need a high profile 4wd vehicle for every day driving that can handle deep snow, ice, and steep inclines in deep snow and ice. Once you get up the steep incline and back a few miles on graveled county roads, the private road to my house is a sharp turn, a small incline, another sharp turn, and then 300 feet down the driveway. The snow is sometimes 12 inches deep the whole way.

Currently, I borrow a tractor once or twice a year, which is why the snow is never plowed off the drive, I call friends with big gas hog trucks to haul hay and livestock, and I drive this:

http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/2252/act/usedcarreviewphotos/

While I love my 'yota for her absolute dependability, low maintenance, decent (for a truck) gas mileage, and ability to do it all except haul the heavy loads, I'd also love an electric, or at least a hybrid, version.

[Maestro]

32. Really though,

if most of the economy is switched to producing electric cars and consumers buy these guys, the few gas powered engines that are used for very specific purposes really won't impact the environment nears as much since most other people are simply commuting in their electric cars. I see these fossil fuel vehicles still being used for a long time to come but just in very task specific purposes. Farming may be one of them until technology can provide the electric torque and horsepower needed. Or perhaps biodiesels could fill this niche.

[LWolf]

43. That's true.

If I had the money to buy a full-size truck or tractor, they come with diesel engines that will run on biodiesel, and we now have (1!) gas station , about 16 miles from my house, that carries biodiesel.

Meanwhile, since my salary doesn't run to farm equipment, I keep borrowing!

[laundry_queen]

61. There should also be

electric construction equipment, I cannot believe the crap those monsters are spewing outside of my home every day.

[LWolf]

63. I agree.

Still, though, if we're all going to plug in at home, and if everything is going electric, we'd better find some cleaner ways to generate electricity.

[gula]

19. Just as important: how and where we build.

Maybe we should go back to building dwellings that do not need to rely on, if not any at least a minimum use, of A/C and heating. And how about building communities that reduce or even eliminate the use of a car? I live in an 16-unit condo and 3 of the 6 garages are owned by non-car owners.

Somebody please explain to me the reason for this: http://tinyurl.com/onqwa

[InkAddict]

30. Apartment garages are less expensive

than Storage USAs lockers when one is downsizing. Against the day I break my service for 4, I've got another two sets (one old one I purchased before marrying 35 years ago, and another that belonged to Gramps, now deceased. Also available, twin bed, sofa, dining room set & hutch (all to be used when the adult college kid finally leaves or has their own place), gobs of books that fit nicely in a 4 bdrm library but not in a 2 bdrm apt. Also, hobby tools and such that the unemployed can no longer afford in their leisure/unproductive misery. Trouble is, without jobs, the auctioneer is more likely to have some work soon and, once more, the best laid plans will be trumped.

Sorry, this has nothing to do with the topic of energy conservation, just an answer to why folks have garages without cars inside.

[gula]

44. In the suburbs maybe, but not in town.

[EstimatedProphet]

22. Not only these things, but orbital solar power stations

Let's get power production off the Earth entirely! We can do it, the technology is available now, and we can have major production going possibly within 10 years!

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/ssp-01b.html

[DoYouEverWonder]

90. Imagine if instead of blowing a billion+ a week in Iraq

we spent that money on developing and installing alternative forms of energy?

Instead of a chicken in every pot, we need a solar panel in every yard (or a windmill - depending on local conditions).

[Poiuyt]

27. Destruction of the rain forests must stop also

Not only here, but also in places like the Amazon

[Dems Will Win]

29. Yes that's very important too

like population control. All of these things have to be done simultaneously. If they are, they reinforce regeneration. If the opposite, degeneration of the environment will occur.

[Maestro]

31. Excellent information!

Kicked, bookmarked and read!

[yurbud]

33. also low tech solar like solar chimney or focused solar thermal PICS

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



http://engnet.anu.edu.au/DEresearch/solarthermal/pages/basics.php

In a pinch, someone with a basic knowledge of tools could make these in their backyard, and hook them up to a car generator.

[yurbud]

34. two words: energy internet. As long as power companies monopolize

generation, they can screw us at will and squealch new tech.

If everybody is making their own and feeding it into the grid, prices will drop and stabilize, and you are less likely to do something that pollutes a lot in your own literal backyard.

[yurbud]

35. here in Southern California, every house and apartment could be solar

and most places at the beach could use wind too.

[Dems Will Win]

37. Actually, it's the big utilities that are going to be

buying the Concentrating Photovoltaics and creating enormous solar farms, like 300 MW and up. For peak power demand for air conditioners in the summer.

Just $3 to $4 a watt installed! The economics are there now.

It's 2006...

[roody]

39. Add major improvement and use of public transportation.

[theophilus]

45. FANTASTIC POST! The grass roots must make it HAPPEN!!!

I'll throw out my thoughts again. If the "market" doesn't respond fast enough to this then our government needs to step in and nationalize the production of these planet saving devices. Put people to work at good salary. The economy will boom.

National Health Care......the economy will boom.


Voluntary birth control......baby numbers WON'T boom, for a change. We must adopt and encourage negative population growth in this country and the world. Not from plague and famine but from informed choice.

Don't be a YOYO!!!!!!

The GOP has become the “YOYO” party………..”You’re On Your Own”. They would love to undo every liberal/progressive accomplishment of the last century. No sir, I don’t like it! I am against the YOYO party. I want to form the Anti-YOYO party. The emphasis will be liberal/progressive and environmental. The symbol will be a Tree.
I want all of the citizens of this country to know that they are NOT on their own. The government can care and the government can be made to work to the benefit of all. It will take some work, but it CAN be done. It will need a Rooseveltian program to save the country and, indeed, the WORLD. Climate change will kill us all. We CAN reverse what we have caused if we hit it quick and hit it hard. Details are in the Anti-YOYO Environmental Party platform. Let’s look at some of the planks, shall we?


1. Plant trees in every possible open space between the Mississippi and the East Coast. We need to restore the old ability of a squirrel to go from the Mississippi to the Coast without setting a paw on the ground. The trees will tie up carbon and put oxygen into the air. Fruit and nut trees should be planted in all public areas and along highways, etc. The populace is welcomed to use the fruit for their personal use. Animals will use the rest. Grassy areas need to be done away with except for designated natural meadows for wildflowers, etc. No lawns will mean no mowing. Think of the gas it will save. The shade from the trees needs to cover everything possible….houses, roads, buildings. There will be less runoff containing fertilizer and pesticide so the water will be cleaner.

2. Out west there needs to be a massive deployment of windmills for electric power generation. Farms that are struck with drought can still hold windmills and generate electricity. The farmers will be paid by power companies for excess power produced. A portion of that money will go to pay the government for the wind turbines, etc.

3. Out west and wherever possible there needs to be solar panels put on every structure that is above the trees or in the open to generate power. Same principle as wind mills, the owners will sell power to the electric companies and repay the government with a portion of the profit.

4. Plants will be built by the government, or private industry if they will do it right, to produce seedlings, build wind turbines, and build solar panels. Jobs will be significant and carry full health benefits. More jobs can be created to plant trees, tend to the forests, and help distribute needed parts of the process.

5. Organic farms, using the minimum pesticides and fertilizers need to be established and employ as many as possible with good salaries and health benefits. The food will be sold directly to the public at the lowest prices possible.

6. Universal single payer healthcare (Surgically Remove the Middle Men). This will allow a burst of entrepreneurial spirit never before seen. There will be more tax dollars taken in and the middle and lower class will do better and better. Believe me, it can work.

Some things we will ALL need to do:

1. Be happy with less. We need to realize and point out that GREED is a planet killing problem. For the religious, it is a mega bad SIN.

2. We have to be willing to tax the Corporations and the Rich in a fair way. They need to all give their fair share to save our country and our world. (They won’t be making much when their customers are all dead. To live a few months/years longer than the vast majority of the world is a silly goal.)

3. We must embrace environmentally friendly technologies, whether they are our first choice or not. Once again, your hummer won’t be much use when you’re dead or out of gas.

4. Stop wars of aggression and aggrandizement. Everyone should have clean water, clean air, AFFORDABLE and dignified healthcare, and a life suitable to pursuing happiness.

Make Government actually WORK for the people. Make it accountable and make it honest. (We might have to tinker with the Constitution a bit, but mostly we just need to enforce laws we already have.)

Possible slogans:

End War and Save Our Planet
Less is More (At Least You’ll Be Alive!)
Greed Kills Planets
Greed Kills People

Remember: If we do nothing, we are going to have to change. There just won’t be nearly as many of us to do it. Let’s make the choices now, hard as they may be, and live to pat each other on the back!

[Dems Will Win]

46. You should make this a thread.

We need to make a DU platform and DU Energy Plan...

[theophilus]

47. I've tossed it out as a thread. It didn't get a lot of attention. These

topics are getting more viewers. As the times get "darker" more folks will respond, I hope. There is a lot of great info out there. Al Gore realizes that the action will be taken from the bottom up. The corporate shills at the top aren't having any of this sensible action. Anyway, thanks. We need a rich and powerful charasmatic leader to get the word out. It might be Al, it might be somebody else but we must continue to be gadflies at the "bottom" of the ladder. Change WILL happen!

[femrap]

65. Great post....

BTW...Greed sucks!

And for the religious....Satan Loves Greed!

[Surya Gayatri]

82. Wow, thank you Theo for this positive

vision of a truly pro-life future for the planet. Envisage, act & it will come to pass! SG

[NMDemDist2]

48. my DH today surprised the heck out of me today

he's "I'm Mr Moderate, both fringes are wacky" all the time

so we're doing the grocery shopping and as he's bagging up the groceries he starts telling the cashier about the CFL bulbs we're buying and "if only everyone in the country would just change out 3 bulbs for these it would be like taking millions of cars of pollution off the roads. If we don't do something we'll all in big trouble."

:wow:

I was shocked but proud, I must be getting through to him LOL

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jmowreader]

50. Jets need to burn biodiesel, not hydrogen

Hydrogen-powered aircraft would need to carry a hydrogen tank aloft that would essentially eliminate the plane's ability to carry revenue cargoes--passengers or freight.

OTOH, you could put biodiesel, which a turbine engine can use, in the same fuel tanks that now carry Jet A.

[Bushwick Bill]

51. Nine critical questions about alternative energy.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/052703_9_questions.html

Anyway, I guess my thing is that if we are not already screwed by global warming, peak oil/natural gas will kill our consumption soon enough so that global warming won't be a problem...UNLESS we start firing up the coal.

[theophilus]

59. Well, I think we can have a relatively "soft" landing if we work like

our lives depend on it....and they DO! The last part of the article is the most important, imo. We must FIRST decide to change our lifestyles and do with less as a people. I realize some on the earth couldn't have any less, but I'm looking at the developed world here. We just need to know that if we don't choose to live with less we will die much sooner than we expected and there might not be any more of "us" down the road.

If we cut our consumption in the developed world dramatically, we can tear into building solar cells and windmills out the wazoo. Petroleum can still be used to make fertilizer and other stuff as long as CO2 is not being produced. Is that possible?

Anyway, cut population by choice, stop wars of aggression, go back to a more agrarian lifestyle, have universal health care, have government subsidized or owned factories producing alternative energy sources. All this and a lot more.

Hey, can we grow meat from cells....like a culture? No animals necessary? How would you feed the cells? Glucose? Anyway, no pasture animals would be a good thing and we'd still have meat.....I dunno, would it be possible?

The idea is to be positive and work like the dickens......Change WILL happen!

I don't think we can swing the hydrogen economy or ethanol aplenty right now, either. Electricity by solar, wind, tide, and other methods (see up thread) is the way to go. Can someone come up with a way to store lightning? That would be a lot of volts for something or other......

[RedEarth]

54. K&R

[The Doctor.]

56. The only issue with the electric vehicles ...

Is that you need coal or oil to create the electricity with.

Six of one, half-dozen of the other.

-Until the renewable methods are in place, that is.

[Dems Will Win]

57. Yes, but if you charge at night

you are using off-peak amps that otherwise go to waste. We can lower our use of gasoline for passenger cars 85% without burning any extra fuel for electricity.

The US would be energy independent then, and 8 million barrels of oil per day from the US would not go into the atmosphere.

[The Doctor.]

66. Then it becomes peak.

I agree that we could keep the spread area down, but the aggregate would be roughly the same.

The system is dynamic. Demand will alter the dynamic. Optimization alters demand.

[Touchdown]

68. Coal plants burn at 90% efficency, ICEs in cars burn at 26%

Controlling the emissions of 1000 coal plants is easier than 120 million cars and trucks. Coal is a domestic fossil fuel, less wars in the middle east. Coal can be re-bburned for even more efficiency. Coal can also be replaced by wind, H/E, Solar and Tidal technologies. It's more like two to the dozen actually.

Refineries also use coal burning plants to make gasoline. One of those arguments that never come up when people poo-pooh the electric car.:hi:

[NobleCynic]

71. Aye, but transmission from the power plant to the charging station

eats up some of that efficiency gap. And more is lost in the actual transfer to the battery. Still better than ICE's in terms of efficiency, but certainly not 90% to 26%. Maybe 50-75% to 26%.

[Touchdown]

75. Which is why that car company is selling a solar panel option with it.

Put the panels on the roof, the day hours send the energy into the grid, and it generates enough energy to cover the cost of charging the car at night, plus a little extra juice to pop some corn, make some ice, cool a Pepsi and watch Star Wars on full surround blast while it's charging. "But I was going into Totche Station to pick up some power converters!"

[muriel_volestrangler]

103. No, current coal plants burn at about 35% efficiency on average

For instance:

The program's goal is to develop a multi-megawatt SOFC power system, 100 megawatts and larger, with at least 50 percent overall efficiency in converting energy contained in coal to grid electrical power. This compares to today's average U.S. coal-based power plant with an electrical efficiency of approximately 35 percent.

http://www.versa-power.com/news/FuelCell_Energy_Selected_by_DOE_2.27.06.pdf#search=%22coal%20power%20efficiency%20electric%22

If the waste heat from them can be used for something, you do get back more 'efficiency', but not in the form of electricity - you use it for local heating.

[Touchdown]

117. Sorry. That's not what energy experts say.

Your link is to a company press release. Most power engineers, and scientists say the average efficiency of current power plants are at the mid 80s to 90s. Not to say we shouldn't try to get rid of coal burning and replace them over time, but to sacrifice the electric car over the issue of up-useage of coal burning plants is pure myopia. Pound for pound, a few hundred EPA regulated coal plants produces less greenhouse gasses than hundreds of millions of gas and deisel powered autos do.

I'll say it again. Oil refineries also use coal burning electric plants to make gasoline, lubricating oil and other petroleum products. Filter and muffler companies use coal burning plants to smelt the metal and manufacture their fiber filters. Refuse plants use coal burning plants to dispose of the used oil from all the autos they drain every 3000 miles, and the list goes on. None of which will be used with any pure plug in electric car. You want to talk about the up-useage of electric cars, then let's be fair and talk about the up-useage of ICE autos too.

[muriel_volestrangler]

118. Will you believe the Dept of Energy and EPA?

CO2 emissions from electric power generation are influenced by the efficiency with which fossil fuels are converted into electricity. In a typical power plant, about one-third of the energy contained in the fuel is converted into electricity, while the remainder is emitted as waste heat. Substantial improvements in generation efficiency can be achieved in the future through the replacement of traditional power generators with more efficient technologies, such as combined-cycle generators and combined heat and power (CHP) systems. In these types of systems, waste heat is captured to produce additional kilowatthours of electricity or displace energy used for heating or cooling. Both strategies result in lower CO2 emissions. The national average thermal efficiency of power generation from fossil fuels in 1999 was estimated to be 32.54 percent, slightly higher than the previous year's average of 32.42 percent.(17)

The average thermal efficiency of coal-fired plants went from 33.15 percent to 33.54 percent in 1999. The improvement in efficiency is also reflected in the national average output rate of pounds of CO2 per kilowatthour. The output rate for coal-fired plants decreased from 2.117 pounds of CO2 per kilowatthour in 1998 to 2.095 in 1999. Petroleum-fired plants and natural gas-fired plants showed slightly lower thermal efficiencies in 1999, with a corresponding change in the output rate. The rate for petroleum-fired plants increased from 1.915 to 1.969 pounds of CO2 per kilowatthour, and natural gas-fired plants' output rate increased from 1.314 to 1.321 pounds of CO2 per kilowatthour.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/co2_report/co2report.html

Who do you think supplies the figures for power company press releases? Power engineers and scientists, of course. There are basic thermodynamic considerations that limit the efficiency of both thermal power stations, and ICEs - the absolute temperature at which they run, versus the absolute temperature of the sorrundings where waste heat is rejected. With the surroundings at about 280K, to achieve 80% efficiency you'd need to run at 1400K (that comes from Carnot's equation for maximum theoretical heat engine efficiency). Gas turbines can achieve a higher temperature than steam turbines (they need special materials for that, because steel melts around 1400K), and combined cycle plants use the still quite high temperature exhaust gas to drive a second steam cycle. But they run on gas, not coal.

The DOE has an R&D project, whose aim is to achieve a generating efficiency of 45-50% from a coal-fired plant, through the generation of synthetic gas from the coal, which then goes into a combined cycle gas turbine.

[BeyondThePale]

58. I thought that all we had to do was give money to Oral Roberts...

[IndyOp]

60. Dayum! DemsWillWin for PRESIDENT! QUICK - Run for Congress...

and then run for Speaker of the House so you can be President in about 6 months from now!

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[Dems Will Win]

94. If nominated I will run, if elected I will serve...

[laundry_queen]

62. K&R

Those of us with the means should also look into retrofitting our homes with geothermal, solar and wind energy. By next year or the year after we should be off the grid. :)

[mom cat]

99. Congradulations! I am heading in that direction too, but it will take me

longer.

[L0oniX]

64. We will be out of gas way before that

[Touchdown]

74. With positive feedback, it could still happen anyway.

The tipping point is 10-15 years away. We will still have oil then.

Negative feedback is your thermostat clicking the heater off when it's warm enough.
Positive feedback is your thermostat clicking and the heater still runs, getting hotter the more the thermostat clicks.

With too much CO2 in the air, the atmosphere begins a positive feedback trend, holding in heat, and absorbing more from the sun, killing more plant life, thus creating more carbon dioxide, and escalating that cycle until the Earth becomes Venus 200-300 years from now at 9000 degrees F. That point of no return is said to be 15 years away.

[L0oniX]

113. You have listened to the wrong people ...we are at peak oil production ...

right now. Check the info below or Google "peak oil".

http://hubbert.mines.edu/news/Ivanhoe_02-4.pdf
http://www.projectcensored.org/newsflash/the_hirsch_report.pdf

[Lorien]

69. One to add: stop eating beef:

http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/reports/beyond.html

[Dems Will Win]

70. Correct, Agriculture releases methane

so the less the better, and beef uses up a lot more grain than vegetarian diets. We also have to go to no-till or low-till to reduce methane releases.

Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

Hmm. Have to give up SUVs AND steak.

Now you know as President of the United States (I was nominated and won the election upthread), I'll have to include beef rationing if people don't cut down on their hamburgers and steaks.

They'll probably never do that, so I'll just declare all beef and red meat unsafe due to current industry practices on Mad Cow Disease--which is true--and shut the whole damn thing down with an Executive Order.

Hey, this is fun being President.

Maybe I should run--if Edwards doesn't clean Hillary and McCain's clock.

[Touchdown]

73. That aint' going to happen.

I'm willing to work with you on all these other options, but cowtowing (yes that's a pun) to the Veginistas will NEVER happen with me. Free range is a solution I know to be good, but Man can't drive all grazing animals from 90% of their native grazing land, so we can build grain farms (which isn't food until it's processed and cooked...Beef can be eaten raw), and drive them up into the mountains and starve them to death and near extinction and say that "Cows and pigs are polluting our water and air" without taking responsibility on how we had a part in the outcome of that.

Bottom line. Humans create digestive acids as well as alkalines, which means we are OMNIVORES. Accept human nature and work to adapt our farming practices.

An electric car, or solar powered half in the ground dwellings? Absolutely. Give up the human's natural diet? Out of the question! It's one thing to live, but it must be worth living for.

[autorank]

76. K&R...Three cheers for you!!! n/t

[CountDmoney]

77. at least we have a plan here n/t

[rosesaylavee]

85. New LED research may lead to better electrical efficiency...

Info at this link about the research group...

http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/solidstate/

Solid-state lighting has the potential to revolutionize the lighting industry. Light-emitting diodes (LEDs)—commonly used in signs, signals and displays—are rapidly evolving to provide light sources for general illumination. This technology holds promise for lower energy consumption and reduced maintenance.

Another related link...

http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/resources/newsroom/pr_story.asp?id=60

Electronic Walls and Ceilings Make it Easy to Change Lighting and Room Design

The Alliance for Solid-State Illumination Systems and Technologies (ASSIST), an LED industry group organized by the Lighting Research Center (LRC) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, unveiled a novel concept for lighting homes and offices. The design integrates light-emitting diode (LED) technology with building materials and systems to create electronic walls and ceilings. The design includes interchangeable, modular panels with integrated LED lighting fixtures that "snap" in and out of an electrical grid. Occupants can change the location of light fixtures or introduce new fixtures on a whim to satisfy their needs or their mood.
...

The design team, led by Dr. Narendran and Russ Leslie, LRC associate director and architect, built a full-scale vignette of an executive office at the LRC to showcase the group's ideas for adaptable lighting. Rearranging the LED panels on the walls and ceiling in the room is easier than moving furniture, according to the researchers. There is no need to drill holes, patch drywall, call an electrician, or lay out the room according to where the electric sockets are installed. Once in place, the LED panels are controlled by a touch-screen LCD panel mounted on the wall.
....

"The transformation from gas lighting to electric lighting called for a quantum leap in infrastructure change, but people embraced the new system because the technology allowed for better lighting, flexibility, and a host of additional technological advances," said Leslie. "Our proposed concept is an equivalent leap in technology and infrastructure change, and one that promotes a 'tunable' lighting environment for improved vision, mood, productivity, health, and aesthetics."
...

Makarand "Chips" Chipalkatti, Ph.D., innovation management, OSRAM SYLVANIA: "In many ways, this recent design concept with LEDs is profound, as light can now become part of the architecture. In the short term, it may be possible to build replacement LED lamps to fill existing sockets and luminaires, but in the long term the very nature of construction and buildings will go through a change, the way it did during the transition from gas to electric lamps. To truly realize the full potential offered by LEDs in lighting and architecture, we must invest our thinking and resources in the area of new infrastructure and standards."

Gore is right. We have the technological know-how to turn this around, make it profitable for us (if USA decides sooner than later to be the leader in this technology), and the economical benefits will be enormous.

I predict if Gore becomes the next president, we will turn it around and he will end his 2nd term with a surplus from the new technology he would encourage to develop.

Love this thread. K & R and bookmarked for future reference.

[Deja Q]

87. Who pays for all this?

Judging by current trends, nobody. Because it's not profitable... and people can't afford jack these days anyway.

The top 1% sure as hell won't dip in.

For all this is the Rapture.

A paradigm shift is needed.

All we're seeing is a shifting of the problem -- out of America and into other countries. Because that's more profitable for3 the top 1%... even though it does nothing for the environmental or population problems (BTW: An educated populace is less likely to go overboard with breeding... pity they're nixing the educational system too...)

[Dems Will Win]

106. Your information is so 2005 -- But this 2006, so everything has changed!

Who's paying for it?

Big utilities are right now contracting these breakthrough technologies for literally Gigawatts of solar and windfarms.

Here is the DOE's NREL Lab itself on Concentrating PV:

Cost Competitive Electricity from Photovoltaic Concentrators Called 'Imminent'

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Golden, Colo. — Solar concentrators using highly efficient photovoltaic solar cells will reduce the cost of electricity from sunlight to competitive levels soon, attendees were told at a recent international conference on the subject. Herb Hayden of Arizona Public Service (APS) and Robert McConnell and Martha Symko-Davies of the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) organized the conference held May 1-5 in Scottsdale, Ariz.

"Concentrating solar electric power is on the cusp of delivering on its promise of low-cost, reliable, solar-generated electricity at a cost that is competitive with mainstream electric generation systems," said Vahan Garboushian, president of Amonix, Inc. of Torrance, Calif. "With the advent of multijunction solar cells, PV concentrator power generation at $3 per watt is imminent in the coming few years," he added.

We have seen steady progress in photovoltaic concentrator technology. We are working with advanced multijunction PV cells that are approaching 38% efficiency, and even higher is possible over time. Our goal is to install PV concentrator systems at $3 per watt, which can happen soon at production rates of 10 megawatts per year. Once that happens, higher volumes are readily achieved," Hayden, Solar Program Coordinator at APS, said.

Growth in the photovoltaic (PV) concentrator business was reflected in the conference attendance, three times that of the 2003 version. This rapid growth was attributed to recent PV concentrator installations and sales forecasts along with excitement created by new solar cell efficiencies approaching 40%. At the conference, NREL announced a new record efficiency of 37.9 percent at 10 suns, a measure of concentrated sunlight. Soon thereafter Boeing-Spectrolab, under contract to NREL and the Department of Energy, surpassed the NREL record with 39.0 percent at 236 suns announced at the European photovoltaic conference in Barcelona, Spain. The efficiency of a solar cell is the percentage of the sun's energy the device converts to electricity.

Photovoltaic (PV) concentrator units are much different than the flat photovoltaic modules sold around the world; almost 1,200 megawatts of flat PV modules were sold last year. PV concentrators come in larger module sizes, typically 20 kilowatts to 35 kilowatts each, they track the sun during the day and they are more suitable for large utility installations.

Another highlight of the conference was the announcement by Amonix Inc. of a joint venture with Spain's Guascor which will build a 10-megawatt per year assembly plant in Spain by the end of 2005. Amonix also plans to install 3 megawatts of PV concentrator systems in the southwestern U.S. while Guascor plans to install 10 megawatts of concentrator PV systems in Spain in 2006.

Solar Systems of Australia announced plans to install more than 5 megawatts of PV concentrator systems in 2006. "Solar Systems' experience gained from installing and operating reliable PV concentrator systems over the last decade combined with its strong relationship with Spectrolab Inc., a leading manufacturer of multijunction solar cells, is poised to make a major step towards being a mainstream power producer," said Dave Holland, CEO of Solar Systems Australia. "The new solar cell technology from Spectrolab will enable us to upgrade our systems from 24 kilowatts to 35 kilowatts, a 46 percent increase in output," he added.

The ultra-high efficiency solar cell technology, initially discovered at NREL and successfully developed for space satellites in the 1990s by Boeing-Spectrolab Inc., in Sylmar, Calif., proves to be enabling for low-cost terrestrial SEC systems. "Today, we are capitalizing on the major investments made by the space satellite industry and reducing the cost of the semiconductor solar cell by two to three orders of magnitude by operating the cells under high sun concentrations, typically 300 to 1000 times. Boeing-Spectrolab and NREL have demonstrated over 37 percent efficient concentrator solar cells and field testing of Spectrolab's cells for over one year with no degradation promise a bright future. We expect concentrator solar cell performance to reach or exceed 40 percent by 2006 and anticipate continued enhancement in performance and reliability," said Dr. Nasser Karam, vice president of Advanced Technology Products at Spectrolab Inc. "We are working closely with PV concentrator manufacturers to ensure their success and expedient deployment of the multijunction PV concentrator cells" said Dr. Raed Sherif, director of PV concentrator products, at Spectrolab.

The U.S. Department of Energy, through NREL and its High Performance Photovoltaic Project, funds many of the U.S. research efforts reported at the conference.

NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy's primary national laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development. NREL is operated for DOE by Midwest Research Institute and Battelle.

For further information contact NREL Public Affairs at [phone].

[muriel_volestrangler]

89. Add: Building efficiency standards

A lot of our energy use goes into heating or cooling buildings; but it seems most of that could be avoided with better design, and strict adherence to standards.

But I can support the government when it says it wants to “simplify and streamline” the building regulations(13). My suggestion is that it reduces them to one sentence. “By 2010, no house in this country shall be built with a heating or cooling system.”

This sounds ridiculous, outrageous. Does Monbiot want us all to freeze to death? Far from it. In Germany there are now some 4000 homes built to the “passivhaus” standard(14). A passivhaus is a house without radiators, fan heaters, stoves, air conditioners or any other kind of heating or cooling device. The only heat it requires is produced by sunlight coming through the windows and by the bodies of the people who live there. A study of over 100 passive homes showed they had a mean indoor temperature of 21.4 degrees during the bitter German winter(15). That’s 2.4 degrees warmer than the average British home(16).

All that distinguishes them from other houses is that they are built properly. They are airtight (the air which enters the house comes through a heat exchange system) and have no “thermal bridges” – material which can conduct heat from the inside of the house to the outside. The windows are matched carefully to the volume of the house. Because they have no active heating systems, they are not much more expensive to build than ordinary houses. A development of 20 homes in Freiburg, with a measured energy saving of 79%, cost just 7% more than a typical building of the same kind(17).

I fail to see why the passivhaus cannot become a universal standard. But this standard – like all those the government might propose – will be a waste of time until our building control officers are forced to do their jobs properly. What is the point in investing in nuclear power, or any other generating technology, if we can’t sort out something as simple as this?

George Monbiot

Monbiot simplifies above slightly - the heat produced by (efficient) appliances is also part of what helps heat the houses (heat from cooking, waste water that was heated for washing machines, showers etc., what heat there is from efficient TVs, computers, lights, and so on). But this kind of efficiency is vital if the heat from natural gas, or heating oil (">22% of US energy use - almost as much as the 26.6% used for transportation), that now supplies our buildings isn't going to add to the electrical load. Similarly, good design and construction can get rid of the need for air conditioning in the vast majority of cases.

[leftchick]

91. excellent post DWW!

:applause:

[DarleenMB]

96. Windpower for your home

This is SO cool! We're going to try and put it on our new house.

http://www.mag-wind.com/

Something nearly EVERYONE can do ... it's quite affordable.

Also, nearly forgot about the GEM car. It's good in urban areas and for short hops around town:

http://www.gemcar.com/

It's NOT too late if people who CAN will do something on a personal level. All change starts with the person in the mirror.

/rosecoloredglasses

[mom cat]

104. ou happen to know how much the mag wind units cost?

This does look like a good idea.

[GliderGuider]

102. A look at the other side of the question

OK, some of you are going to find this comment overly pessimistic, but I feel there needs to be a dose of reality in this thread. Humanity is facing a set of massive, intertwined problems right now, all due to our population and the way we have used the planet’s resources. The Club or Rome has named this Gordian Knot “the world problematique”. It consists of at least the following elements:

• Climate change
• Oil and natural gas depletion
• Air, water and soil pollution
• Depletion of soil fertility and fresh water reserves
• Deforestation and desertification
• Depletion of ocean fish stocks
• Massive extinctions
• Biodiversity loss
• Economic instability
• Social stress

These problems all have global scope, are often linked in positive feedback loops, and the solution to one can often make another one worse.

Of all of these problems, oil depletion is the most pressing and the most catastrophic. The peak in global oil production, if it hasn’t already arrived, is predicted by serious analysts to be less than five years off. Beyond that point oil will begin to deplete at an as-yet unknown rate, with estimates ranging from 2% to 8% per year. Any number in that range will be calamitous for civilization. Global warming has the potential to be more devastating over the long term, but it can’t hold a candle to the effects of oil depletion in the 10 to 30 year range.

What this thread has been looking at, with some exceptions, are technical options for the maintenance of Business As Usual in terms of lifestyle. There is no way on God’s brown, exhausted Earth that this is going to be possible. The intersecting problems are too large, and the time is too short. A report written last year for the Department of Energy, known as the Hirsch Report (pdf warning), concludes that we need 20 years of full-out effort to survive the transition to a 2% oil depletion rate without major problems. If the peak is closer than 20 years, or we don't put all our effort into mitigation, or the decline is steeper than 2%, all bets are off.

According to the calculations in the book “Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update”, we have already overshot the Earth’s carrying capacity by 20%. The implication is that with an immediate 20% reduction in population we might have a chance to stabilize the situation. That in turn implies the immediate deaths, from one cause or another, of well over 1 billion people, followed by an immediate rise in the general death rate to give the world zero population growth. The longer we keep growing, the grimmer that statistic becomes.

For the techno-utopians in the crowd, I’ve done a calculation of what it would cost to replace 25% of American oil consumption with electricity from wind turbines. The analysis is at the top of the Peak Oil board here on DU, but the executive summary is that the wind turbines alone would cost almost 2 trillion dollars. That’s 1/5 of the United States’ GDP, and it doesn’t take into account the cost of upgrading the transmission infrastructure, or whether the US still has the industrial capacity or skilled personnel required to do the job. And remember that the problem is global in scope - just "fixing" it in North America will help little.

It’s nice to see so many people here being so positive, but I'm afraid you haven’t done the numbers. Crunching the numbers on the scale of the problem and the true costs of solving it leads to a massively pessimistic conclusion. Just because it’s unpleasant to think about doesn’t invalidate it.

For anyone wondering why I feel that Peak Oil is the real killer, you can take a look at my Powerpoint presentation on the subject, at http://www.paulchefurka.com/peakoil/PeakOil.ppt.

Sorry to rain on the parade.

[Dems Will Win]

107. Your energy information is so 2005 -but this is 2006...

So everything has changed (on energy anyway).

I agree with your list. These are our biggest problems, along with an outdated educational system and a medical system bought out by drug companies.

However, all these problems are part of one underlying falsehood: the Mechanistic Paradigm, the science that sees the universe as though it were a machine.

The ultimate answer is to shift the paradigm from Mechanistic models to organic or biological models. That'll takes care of most of these problems, but we still have to switch to renewable energy.

Just as I have given an overview of my solution to the energy crisis, which ameliorates the oil crunch with electric cars, I will, in subsequent threads, provide solutions to ALL your problems with practical science, technology and practical philosophy and community development.

So you don't have to worry, I really have figured this all out, just as I did with this energy thread. It's all new and nothing you have ever heard before, so sit back and wait and the answers will be delivered on a silver platter, as this thread does.

We can't do all this separately--we must come together as communities and act together.

As for your statement:

It’s nice to see so many people here being so positive, but I'm afraid you haven’t done the numbers. Crunching the numbers on the scale of the problem and the true costs of solving it leads to a massively pessimistic conclusion. Just because it’s unpleasant to think about doesn’t invalidate it.

You're wrong, I have crunched the numbers and it's very doable.

I have to run right now but I will be back in about 30 minutes with the #s for you. Please remember this is 2006, not 2005, when you are correct the economics did not make any sense.

Thankfully, those were the bad old days...

HAPPY 2006!!

[GliderGuider]

108. I'l await your other numbers with great interest

I fail to see how one year can make such a difference to the economic outloook of such a widely varying set of problems. I have to say the notion of a revolutionary change in outlook strikes me as being more than a bit "singularitarian". Do you think that a radical paradigm shift is possible, in India, in China in the Former soviet Union, or even in the USA? Because if it's not, you're spitting into the wind.

[Dems Will Win]

109. Thanks for bringing up reality, here are the new numbers and more:

I should warn you I work in the renewable energy industry.

Solar Power used to cost $7 to $8 a watt installed, Concentrating Photovoltaics (CPV) is less than half that, around $3 a watt installed. Silicon panels are about 11% to 14% efficient and require 5 acres per Megawatt, the new CPV is only 1 acre per megawatt. Since land is typically 20% of the cost of a solar project, reducing that cost from 20% to 4% is a huge change in numbers--on top of the mere $3 a watt instead of $8 a watt. The machines last for 30 years and are out of R&D.

Politics has become irrelevant, for with these numbers the market takes over. Multi-billion dollar solar farms are being contracted by huge utilities and landowners for the new CPV. You can buy the old panels for your house but soon the utlities in the Southwest will be selling you solar power. Lots of it.

Did I mention you can make massive amounts of hydrogen with these CPV units? Cheap, green hydrogen from water, 76% efficient (!).

The new Clipper Wind Turbines are meanwhile less maintenance with their onboard crane and other innovations ($90,000 vs. the old $250,000) plus they are 25% more efficient and still cost just a million dollars a megawatt. They do need a lot of land for the big 2.5 Meg turbines but now you do get more bang for the buck.

The Tesla Roadster gets One measly cent per mile. THe electric charge for 3 1/2 hours for $2.50 gives you 250 miles (the sedan will probably be only 150-200 mile range, although the battery makers are promising to soon double power!). Now there's another 2006 number quite different from 2005, because in my car I'm spending 10 cents a mile and I have to fix the car. Tesla Motors cars won't require maintenance as they are electric motors without gears, pistons, oil filters, radiators, etc., etc.

Tidal power meanwhile may be the best energy investment of all from what I've read, as it is 24/7. The new tidal machines also were not here in 2005, nor were the new economics they will bring. I would have to look that up for you but you could do that or someone else could.

Bush is irrelevant! Energy paradigms are irrelevant in the face of such cheap wind and solar power and the new DESIRABLE electric car.

However, to succeed in conservation, in needed lifestyle changes and for the rest of the problems you list we do need a paradigm shift--from the Mechanistic to the Organic Worldview, and that's why I have written a book to do just that. The end of the book is a blueprint for action for the future, including a Global Regeneration Plan based on Regenerative Agriculture and Aquaculture, a Global, Internet-based Progressive Education, Integrative Medicine, and so on. It addresses your entire list with one common agenda.

In short, the book points out that there is a second Copernican Revolution beyond the Mechanistic, that the 60s were an Early Enlightenment and now we are in the Intensive Phase of this New Enlightenment. We are duplicating the 1700s very closely.

By 1755, or 2010 in our current Enlightenment Pattern, there was/is the "Paradigm Flip". Between 1755 and 1760, the paradigm flip of the Mechanistic Enlightenment increased the number of new paradigm radical democrats to a high enough percentage so that a revolutionary atmosphere was created. Hurricane Katrina was the point at which the "run-up" to the paradigm flip started in our own time, discrediting the old paradigm, but it is not the flip itself. Yet we are already in the 11th hour of the paradigm flip from Mechanistic to Organic thinking.

Of course then you have all those revolutions to change the world's institutions. It would easily be a global phenomenon, it already is. Hopefully, these revolutions will be of the mind, rather than with the gun. There should not be any need for violence as we now have the ballot box, something the first American and French Revolutionaries did not.

Let's just say it's going to be one hell of a book.

Any questions?

For more info on energy go to the links at the end of the original post.

[GliderGuider]

111. Questions? Well, yes, since you ask

The Tesla is a cool car. However, it's obviously a technology demonstrator pointed at the NA market. Is this technology going to trickle down fast enough to make plug-in electric jitneys possible in Thailand and Chad within ten years?

Since you mention my list of problems, let's look at one of them: food. Globally we are facing a loss of topsoil fertility, a loss of topsoil itself, a loss of irrigation water due to pollution and depletion, the loss of arable land due to desertification, the loss of fertilizer due to a decline in natural gas supplies, and a massive depletion of oceanic fish stocks. I just saw a story about Japanese fishermen shifting their cathes to jellyfish, for instance. All 6.5 billion of us need to eat, and so will our children's children. What qualities of the new paradigm will make it possible to feed all those people given that the problems above have not begun to be addressed yet?

If the authors of LTG are correct, we have overshot our world's carrying capacity by 20% (personally I think we're far worse off than that). This is manifested through rosource depletion and pollution (sources and sinks are both over-exploited). In a general sense, how will your paradigm change address this? Will it enable us to clean up the oceans and repair the damage we have done to pelagic species of all sorts? Will it return the Aral sea to usability? Will it reduce our need for metals to such an extent that we stop depleting our ores?

If you feel it will do this, how much time will be required? My rheumatism tells me there's a big storm coming, and it's not far off. If we miss the ten-year window of opportunity that I think the the absolute maximum time we have left, will it be possible to make such a sea-change in the middle of the storm?

Oh, and one more. When is your book coming out?

[Dems Will Win]

112. Great questions!

You can get on the waiting list now for the Tesla Roadster ($80,000) and get delivery in 2007. The cars they are showing now (in the last 2 weeks) are the production model. It is already approved for US/European roads! They are finishing up the Tesla sedan, which will sell for around $40,000 in volume, with credits, and those are scheduled for delivery in 2008. $60 million and a lot more in financing started up Tesla, and btw, there are 4 other new car companies out there suddenly doing a similar thing.

Asia will not be buying these expensive cars but they will be buying the little electrics the Chinese are making and already selling, while the Chinese in high-level government positions are ready big time to switch from the planned coal plants to the new CPV solar farms instead. The Chinese have the Gobi Desert you know--cheap real estate for CPV farms.

As for soil, Regenerative Soil Science is already taught in universities around the world and is capable, with composting, of restoring fertility and soil health, even from dead soils. The work of George Bird leads the way in soil restoration.

I used to work for The Rodale Institute so I am also an expert in this. With $100 billion, a Global Marshall Plan based on regenerative agriculture, internet education, regenerative soil science and regenerative zero-pollution aquaculture can carry about 10 billion, which is where it has been predicted we will soon level out.

I would hope we never get beyond the number of people we already have but these things don't happen overnight. We need to replace/recycle metal more, this will be a real problem.

The Aral Sea could be restored with a Regional Regenerative Zone Plan. The Sea dried up because there was no planning--it can be restored.

Robert Rodale invented the Regenerative Zone Method. 10,000 Regenerative zones of 200,000 people each would lift 2 billion out of abject poverty and convert most agriculture and aquaculture to regenerative, organic methods. Local waste would become an important source of nitrogen and artificial fertilizer would no longer be needed (this is already working great with DelMarVa Chicken Farms!).

Natural gas we will soon have a lot of, as huge LNG facilities are being contructed as we blog. We will be going from 4 trillion to 17 trillion cubic tons in supply, so it's going to quadruple within just a few years.

To make all this change happen in time, however, we will need the leaders of the world to declare a state of emergency for global warming and agro-pollution/collapse. To put pressure on our leaders, I recommend huge demonstrations and political organizing behind a common agenda for change.

The solutions are all in my book, which will be out (I hope) in Fall 2007.

Thanks for having that great set of brains you have there.

[theophilus]

116. Talking about the price of land for solar projects......all that

government land out west would be perfect for large solar arrays. They could be spaced so that the native vegetation could go right on growing. Wind power groups would probably do well on lots of government land, too. Hey, it's OUR land, for pete's sake! I say kick the mangy cattle off that are grazing for a penny a square mile or whatever and crank up the electricity and give it to the people. You know I don't get why I don't get a percentage from all the timber companies and oil companies that are fouling our public lands. Where's my cut, George? I'll settle for wind and solar power being generated instead of grazing or strip mining. Wake up America! Change WILL happen.

[MrPrax]

105. A Big Thankyou!!

Finally a real solution with meat on it...

It's really not that difficult and some of these techs do promise a brave new world...

Imagine just how quiet a city would be with electric cars...it would produce a whole new way of life.

[Blue_Tires]

110. ttt n/t