Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (139994)	9/22/2005 11:38:57 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793975

From a policy and national security standpoint, it makes a lot of sense to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. This will reduce CO2 but most of it is now in the atmosphere and will not be naturally processed for many decades. If there has been warming, I would suspect the sun as the cause more than any other. The only rational way to reduce CO2 is to go nuclear. We are going to use more energy in the future, not less.

To: carranza2 who wrote (139994)	9/25/2005 8:02:43 PM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793975

Carranza, 1. From what I could find, Mars, Earth, Pluto and Triton (Neptune's moon) have all recently undergone a planetary warming trend. From what I have seen, Astronomers tend to point this out, and climatologists minimize the effect of the solar output on our current situation (global warming). 2. Do you really think that deforestation is probably part of the reason CO2 may be higher? North American forests have been growing. Do you know if the amount of South American rainforest being deforested is significantly greater than the reforestation of North America? I really don't know. 3 So the question still is, do you continue to spend billions researching global warming or do you spend hundreds of billions (or trillions) to significantly reduce (the rate of increase of) manmade CO2 emissions? 4. How much energy must be consumed in any sequestration technology to capture the CO2 produced by man?