Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Plant more trees? (Score 1) 624

So then no links supporting the claim? that water vapor is a major greenhouse gas isn't in dispute...OP was saying that H20 emitting cars would cause significant effects, but you haven't provided any supporting evidence

As for electrolysis being energy intensive, again, solar power is free fuel to power said process. 8000x more energy hits the earth in a year than we use as an entire planet. We've got all the power we need; just need to harness it.

Comment Re:Plant more trees? (Score 1) 624

Hydrogen can be easily produced with solar, we just need the scale of distribution and storage...which fossil fuel produced hydrogen needs as well.

My question was to your assertion that having all cars emitting H20 vapor would affect greenhouse effect. Anything to support that? (Ignore the source for the moment, as I completely agree, getting hydrogen from fossil fuels would be the wrong direction)

Comment Re:Plant more trees? (Score 1) 624

Long term it could be a solution when we have enough solar/wind power to produce it.

Agreed, the infrastructure needs to be ramped up but the physics and energy needed are all in place right now. Batteries aren't a panacea with current technology as charge times take vastly longer than filling a tank, gas or hydrogen.

Comment Re:Recognizing irony key to transcending militaris (Score 1) 252

Let's assume you create this ideal world of plenty.

What happens in 100 more years when the Earth's population has doubled again, and there's just not enough room/food/water - again?

OR what happens when your Gaia gets hijacked by an autocrat, and you're all out of guns?

The reason we maintain an arsenal is for when the shit hits the fan. It just so happens that coming up with a viable threat against millions of idiots (with minimal casualties) gets expensive. But it also just so happens that having such an effective arsenal brings peace to the majority or large countries in this world.

If you have no guns, then someone else will bring theirs to the party. Consider it one of the costs of maintaining society.

Comment Re: GMO trees... (Score 0) 624

peak oil is a myth. What it really means is that the cost of extracting the oil starts to go up significantly, both in $$$ and in the CO2 released both by extraction and processing; see Tar Sands for an example of a pricey fuel that has massive carbon implications. So your after 'peak' of extraction means exponential CO2 increase.

So oil extraction will continue for well 100 years...by which time NYC and most major world cities will be 10 feet under water.

Comment Re:Plant more trees? (Score 2) 624

#2 interesting point. Any links that show how much h20 would be released if every car was a hydrogen fuel car and whether that would be a significant impact?

Unlike CO2, atmospheric H20 concentrations are determined by temperature, so if more H20 is added that isn't supported by temperature it would condense out...at least that's the laymans science version I believe.

From what I can see, water vapor concentrations are 1000x that of CO2 so it would take considerably more to have the effect. That being mitigated somewhat by the different greenhouse gas strength of the 2 gases but they aren't 1000x different.

Comment Re:GMO trees... (Score 2) 624

The carbon released from rotting/decomposing wood goes into the air. Perhaps it routes through the soil, but it goes up into the air eventually.

Perhaps look at the CO2 levels over the course of the year. High in the fall and winter, low in the spring and summer? Why because last years growth dies and releases the CO2 into the air and the new growth recaptures it (temporarily)

Comment Re:GMO trees... (Score 1, Insightful) 624

Problem is forests are net zero carbon sinks. Unless something stops it cold and buries it everything growing in a forest will be back in the air within 200 years.

Existing forests don't count either. you need all new forests reclaimed from land we currently use for other things. Forests aren't going to grow in a desert so you can't use the vast tracks of land in the south west. We cut down the North East forests centuries ago. The Amazon is turning into a net RELEASE of carbon due to it's clear cutting.

And that's just for a single year. You need to plant billions of trees per year, every year forever because they don't store CO2 permanently.

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't sweat it -- it's only ones and zeros. -- P. Skelly