1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Exxon Offered $10k to Scientists to Debunk U.N. Global Warming Report

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by hotballa, Feb 2, 2007.

  1. NewYorker

    NewYorker Ghost of Clutch Fans

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    41
    It's not even the most efficient storage of energy. It's very inefficient. You're better of transfering the energy into the power grid or charging up a battery and then shipping hydrogen gas (which is also explosive). I kid you not. You have to run a really high current to produce H2 and O2 gas, and you're losing a LOT of energy as heat in the process. it's a highly entrophic process (electrolysis). Not to mention that because you're producing explosive gases - you have to be very careful. Pure Oxygen and Pure Hydrogen?

    Wind can only gain so much efficiency - better design etc. And while Solar Panels have increased in efficiency, it's still not a reliable source of power and not enough to power the main energy needs.

    I think you're missing the sense of scale. By a few order of magnitudes. While alternative energies are a noble pursuit, and reducing consumption by a few percent is definitely a thing we should be trying to do - it's not the solution or even part of the solution. Florescent lightbulbs are more a part of the solution and will save more energy then the combination of all renewable energy sources by an extremely wide margin.

    All of these put together won't make a dent in CO2 production. Not even a small one. You're talk about the needs of 6 billion people and all the industry that goes along with it. All the factories, street lights, office buildings, cars, computers, heating and cooling, TV's. And the energy required is increasing faster than the energy renewable sources are providing. It's a losing strategy and will not cut C02 production at all. CO2 production will still increase.

    If you believe that Global Warming is real and a serious threat, then you must advocate Nuclear (Fission) development. Then fuel cells, and bio fuels and everything becomes possible - because the energy source is there. Fussion won't be possible for probably another century, and renewable sources are well too small a drop in a big ocean. Helpful for reducing an individuals energy bill (even though they might not ever recoup the investment).

    It's good to be noble. But until you add a practical side to it, you'll just end up blowing smoke (no pun intended).
     

Share This Page