2014 was definitely the hottest year on record

[Harrekin]

I spent about an hour researching where we are at with fusion technology. They are predicting a decade before it is in the serious testing stage. A couple billion dollars would go a long way toward this kind of project.

Check out the ITER page.

 

[NLXSK1]

Check out the ITER page.

I read about it. In France. They are leading quite a few technologies including the supercollider there right? Going to be at least 4 years until ITER is completed but I am betting more like 10 and then years more before actual testing. HOWEVER, eventually we will come up with technologies not based on burning fossil fuels. We just cannot force it to happen.

 

[UncleBuck]

is that the same bob tisdale who runs a climate denier website?

LOL!

you are fucking dumb.

 

[ginjawarrior]

Well our current technology is almost entirely carbon based...

You're not gonna cut emissions without a new technology with a similar energy density, you're just gonna make ordinary people pay up and they're not even the ones doing the real polluting.

Sure you can we already have the technology to safely and cleanly go carbon free, Nuclear power.

Now if you're just talking transportation then better batteries/ storage mediums will help, but are only a small part of the equation.

Waiting an extra decade or 2 for new tech isn't a good option anymore

 

[UncleBuck]

there are at least 20 or 30 people scampering around on the planet who have more going on in their noggins than I do. However, I've yet to meet any on this site from your side of the aisle.

didn't you predict a 54-40 romney win based on simple scientific polling data, whereas i predicted every single state correctly based on that same data?

 

[ginjawarrior]

See, this is a good question even if it is sarcastic and rhetorical. And my answer would be that instead of spending money trying to prevent the earth from getting hotter we should spend the money on research on how to be more adaptable to our changing climate.

It's not just humans but rest of the biosphere that needs to adapt or go extinct

Nuclear is what's needed for heavy lifting in power generation

 

[OddBall1st]

Sure you can we already have the technology to safely and cleanly go carbon free, Nuclear power.

Now if you're just talking transportation then better batteries/ storage mediums will help, but are only a small part of the equation.

Waiting an extra decade or 2 for new tech isn't a good option anymore

Ever see one of those Lithium batteries go up ? Take out the car behind and in front. But gasoline is flammable.

 

[UncleBuck]

I accept your admission of defeat.

oh, look. another denier claims to have won the debate.

someone tell NASA.

 

[OddBall1st]

It's not just humans but rest of the biosphere that needs to adapt or go extinct

Nuclear is what's needed for heavy lifting in power generation

This is true Nuclear will solve industrial and private home energy needs forever. There aren`t enough people in that industry to safely run it on a mass scale.

 

[UncleBuck]

The Paris Accord is simply "pay up suckers" tho.

plagiarizing the likes of nitro harley is not your best bet.

buy a stepladder.

 

[ginjawarrior]

This is true Nuclear will solve industrial and private home energy needs forever. There aren`t enough people in that industry to safely run it on a mass scale.

If there is a move to nuclear, there won't be any problem training enough people to run the plants.

 

[OddBall1st]

If there is a move to nuclear, there won't be any problem training enough people to run the plants.

I hope ya right, that`s a no mistake task.

 

[OddBall1st]

oh, look. another denier claims to have won the debate.

someone tell NASA.

The day the Global Warming people address the concerns of the locations of their critical data sources, like runway ends, AC exhaust ports, and other strategic so called easy to access locations,....is the day they might start getting respect. Running from it shows nothing but their true cash hungry colors.

 

[ginjawarrior]

I hope ya right, that`s a no mistake task.

That only really applies to older reactor designs, which are a throwback to cold war.

New generations of reactor have passive safety designed into them, you can walk away from them and it would shut itself down instead of going critical.

 

[OddBall1st]

That only really applies to older reactor designs, which are a throwback to cold war.

New generations of reactor have passive safety designed into them, you can walk away from them and it would shut itself down instead of going critical.

Can`t argue that, but there`s also handling of before and after and transportation things to work on.
There`s no question it`s the safest most cost effective source there is.

 

[Harrekin]

Sure you can we already have the technology to safely and cleanly go carbon free, Nuclear power.

Now if you're just talking transportation then better batteries/ storage mediums will help, but are only a small part of the equation.

Waiting an extra decade or 2 for new tech isn't a good option anymore

Nuclear power?

Seriously?

Instead of producing CO2 as a byproduct youd like to produce radioactive elements, some with a half life of up to 3000 years?

And you say people who use primarily Nat Gas and petrol are shifting the burden to future generations?

 

[OddBall1st]

Nuclear power?

Seriously?

Instead of producing CO2 as a byproduct youd like to produce radioactive elements, some with a half life of up to 3000 years?

And you say people who use primarily Nat Gas and petrol are shifting the burden to future generations?

Wake up, we been doing it for 60 years now.

 

[OddBall1st]

Is there a way to get the warming people to address accusation made against them ? The answer of we`re right you`re wrong that`s it wont do. The remain silent routine is a show of guilt.

They do both.

 

[ttystikk]

oh, look. another denier claims to have won the debate.

someone tell NASA.

I do enjoy pulling your chain on occasion, so I find it impossible to resist pointing out that this thread title is incorrect. 2014 is most definitely NOT the hottest year on record.

That distinction now goes to 2015. Time for a new thread!

 

[ginjawarrior]

Nuclear power?

Seriously?

Instead of producing CO2 as a byproduct youd like to produce radioactive elements, some with a half life of up to 3000 years?

Yep as once you get past the misinformation and hysteria about "hundreds of thousands year half life" you quickly find that the waste is actually unburnt fuel and can be used to make power.

Since disposal of the fission products is dominated by the most radiotoxic fission product, cesium-137, which has a half life of 30.1 years,[6] the result is to reduce nuclear waste lifetimes from tens of millennia (from transuranic isotopes) to a few centuries

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast-neutron_reactor

And you say people who use primarily Nat Gas and petrol are shifting the burden to future generations?

Don't forget coal that releases more radioactive materials into environment than nukes..

But yes they are shifting burden, the co2 we're emmiting will be with us for equally long and the effects possibly 1/2 a million years to clear up

http://www.nature.com/climate/2008/0812/full/climate.2008.122.html