Wind turbines, solar cells, solar furnaces, hydroelectricity, wood, etc. are all at our disposal. I find it insane that no single country has seized the initiative and thrown itself into this project. The outcome is such vast, free energy supply that most countries would not only be self-sufficient with regards to energy needs, but be major exporters too.
There's no point in a country aspiring to take over the World if there's nothing left in the end.
Is there a lack of collective will regarding tackling climate change?
It's insane that we're tearing down nuclear power plants. It's insane that we haven't developed a national collective to build a thousand new nuclear power plants.
Is there a lack of collective will regarding tackling climate change?
You say no country has thrown themselves into it.
The UK has a growing number of wind farms, several sea based hydroelectric schemes, and is currently planning a barrage scheme on the river Severn (one of the best rivers for HEP in the world).
HOWEVER
These are still very expensive, compared to other power sourced, and fairly experimental.
It is this cost that is stopping many countries from expending their own renewable power schemes.
The problem isn't collective will, it is collectivism.
YUP THERES CLIMATE CHANGE IT SURE IS COLD DOWN HERE IN TEXAS
There is a great deal of research yet to be done. PV panels and turbines are still very inefficient, and costly to produce.
Does that mean we should give up, and continue to deplete our oil resources, and continue our addiction to foreign oil supplies? I'd argue no. It is time to accept the challenge, and begin planning for a new sustainable future.
In this economic crisis many are willing to point fingers at the political causes. Few are willing to discuss the fact that the economy we have been enjoying for the past 20 years was simply unsustainable. I lost track of the number of times that leading economic %26quot;experts%26quot; said that the only measure of a healthy economy was perpetual growth. Perpetual growth is a myth. Common sense should tell us that it can't be sustained. We have been going into debt for 20 years. Economic debt, as well as resource debt. The debt is due.
We in America knew in the 1970's that we had to change, but we didn't. We kept building bigger houses, and driving bigger cars. Now we can't afford either. The auto companies are bankrupt, and the housing bubble has burst.
Isn't it time to wake up? It doesn't require collective change. To hell with %26quot;them%26quot;. Buy yourself a smaller home, and install solar and wind systems. Drive a small car. Grow a large garden. Raise rabbits and chickens. Make your own personal preparations for the crisis that has just begun. Good luck!
No, there's a lack of collective will to be suckered in to something that's not happening.
Mixing alternative energy ideas with global warming theories is mixing apples and oranges. But then, the whole global warming industry is a tool for the geenies to change the world.
Yes, particularly during poor economic times environmental issues are always low on peoples' list of priorities. It's unfortunate because this one of the biggest problems humans have ever faced, we need to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions ASAP to minimize the damage we do, and yet it barely even registers on most peoples' radar.
People just have a difficult time looking beyond their day-to-day lives to see the big picture, which is why we need politicians to take the larger long-term view and do something about the problem. Fortunately the US just elected a president who understands the importance of the issue.
I know it's nuts.
There's billions to be made in energy production. If the government invested heavily in renewable energy production then the profits could fund whatever gamble Brown feels like taking and we wouldn't have to suffer.
The problem with those new sources of energy is that they are nowhere near efficient enough to produce the same as fossil fuels.
The financial and economic pressures, such as taxes and financial incentives will help.
What is needed is global coordination. It is pointless if small countries make big improvements if the big countries (USA, China) don't.
i agree. its frustrating. only so much we can do as individuals.
btw, you forgot geothermal ;-) first plant, larderello, started generating in 1904
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_dry_roc鈥?/a>
http://www.reuk.co.uk/Larderello-Worlds-鈥?/a>
there is no energy source that is truly environmentally friendly, the amount of energy produced by wind turbines, solar panels etc isn't enough to cover the energy to make them so they aren't as green as people think. I think the real issue and only way to go back to minimum impact is to go back to ancient times and live off the land properly as we were meant to but I cant see this idea being widely accepted.
Yep there is. There is a lack of will due to resistance to change and the cost of changing. A lot of large company's (mostly the heavy polluters) don't want change as they will effect there business. Otherwise governments in some places are reluctant to change because of costs, opposition from certain lobby groups and so on. The same people that don't want us to change also have the money to push the government not to change.
Its the future but like a lot of things there are people that want to hang onto the past. Often because the future dosnt look so bright for them and they got the power to slow it and stall it best they can.
