Malware

General discussion

Locked

The Nuclear debate rages on...

By Benevolence ·
George Ou recently opened up a particularly large can of worms recently when he wrote an article discussing the myths surrounding Windows XP and power consumption. Much of the debate has turned into a discussion on how to best produce power whilst reducing pollution.

One thing many people seem to agree on is that whether or not humans are contributing to global warming, it is in our best interests to reduce the effect and protect our environment.

Some of us believe we need to move toward nuclear energy production, and some of us believe this is a bad idea.

With so many new developments in energy production, and so many differing arguments, what do you think is the direction we should head in?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I am not so sure

by Benevolence In reply to Thats not the point thoug ...

I agree with the first bit, to a certain extent.

However, about that link, I am not sure that much of what the current administration says or publishes is actually factual. They do lie about a lot, when it suits their interests.

Collapse -

Second link is from the Senate and it links to lots of credible sources

by georgeou In reply to Thats not the point thoug ...

Second link is from the US Senate and it links to lots of credible sources like the Journal Nature and many other reputable scientists.

And there you go again pulling the old "Bush lied" slogan when Bush had nothing to do with that link. I'll ask again, can we please keep the politics out and stick to the topic?

Collapse -

The solution is clear.

by TonytheTiger In reply to Thats not the point thoug ...

we must kill unproductive humans who are wasting resources. Who gets to choose?

Collapse -

And here you go

by DelbertPGH In reply to Here you go

The article on Pinatubo did not include CO2 numbers. It did mention 17 million tons of sulfur dioxide, a serious pollutant and the primary cause of acid rain.

Checking the Wikipedia article on sulfur dioxide, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide, the U.S. ejected 19 million tons SO2 in 2002, and China is estimated at 25 mn tons in 2005, comparable to what the U.S. produced in 1980. We've reduced.

There are volcanos that will dwarf human production, when they ****; e.g., the entire of Yellowstone Park is a caldera, and when it erupts again, it will probably wipe out life in a half dozen Western states and change world climate for a long time. That's atypical.

Collapse -

No, here YOU go!

by Benevolence In reply to And here you go

You do realise that China has a population 4.3 times the US... SO OF COURSE THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO PRODUCE MORE! I( am sure you understand the per capita concept!?!?

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

[edit - for George - here I am responding to mention of levels of SO2 not CO2]

That makes the US around 3.222 times worse on that front!

I can't see that information you just offered up on that Wiki link anyway.

On the Volcano topic. Volcanoes have always been around, doing their stuff. It is the ADDITIVE effect that is concerning to us scientists.

Collapse -

So you believe China should be exempt from Kyoto?

by georgeou In reply to And here you go

Kyoto exempts China, Russia, and other third world nations. Do you think that's right?

Also, don't tell me China pollutes less solely based on CO2 numbers. You hold on to CO2 numbers like they're the only form of pollution on the planet. Go to China sometimes and then tell me if you still think they don't have a pollution problem.

Collapse -

Read more carefully George.

by Benevolence In reply to And here you go

Right. Now you are just being stupid. Go back and read my posts MORE CAREFULLY. I am getting sick of having to correct you about what I have said.

Collapse -

This is where I unsubscribe to this thread

by georgeou In reply to And here you go
Collapse -

Good idea George - edit

by Benevolence In reply to And here you go

There are only so many times you can be corrected on mistakes with reading language before you get embarrassed and leave.

I don't know if you were trying to annoy me by responding to my posts by asking a question I just answered, but it certainly looks that way.

Collapse -

George: You're missing the point about pollution

by neilb@uk In reply to And here you go

every time and it's really quite annoying.

Yes, the Chinese have severe pollution problems caused by rapid unregulated economic expansion. This pollution, for the main part, is local and directly affects very few outside of the Chinese borders.

The point about your CO2 is that - if the climate scientists are correct - it is a major contributory factor to a global problem.

THAT is why we have such a "hang-up" about CO2.

Related Discussions

Related Forums