China’s lack of paranoia

22 02 2007

Many times when panicking about our new skewed flooded world, which will occur after the next ten or so years of global warming and greenhouse gas emissions, we tend to do as Americans do in any situation involving paranoia (as such situations come up quite often). We focus on ourselves. What will I do? What will my family do? What will MY COUNTRY do? We become once again trusting of our government, looking up, crossing our fingers, and awaiting for a response from our country, our U.S.A, the “hero” of civilization and the globe. Often we forget that other countries are aware of the situation as well. Not every other country is one we must rescue. We are not the only one with a plan. Just recently
China has conducted its own research on the negative effects which will harm Chinese coastal cities within the next ten years. Sea level is quickly rising with an expected 31 millimeters within the next ten years. Chinese scientists and oliticians believe that although dykes will be placed to protect the cities, another action is required to save China from Global Warming. May local officials are having a huge amount of pressure placed on them about educating and encouraging the public about conservation and the actions needed. As the second highest contributor to global warming (after the United States of course), China has continued, until recently, to ignore their damaging industries. This is because, “the per capita emissions of the nation’s 1.3 billion people pale in comparison with per capita emissions from developed countries.” As of now, citizens of china are being encouraged to be environmentally conscientious, but the problem is that there is no incentive to do so.
China has implemented no reward or punishment for the citizens to feel compelled to somehow change their routine. As we get supposedly get closer to the D-day of the worlds most developed coastal cities, and the rest of the globe, I wonder if
China really understands what their scientists have warned them about. Will I be proven wrong with the U.S. needing to once again attempt to save the day for the rest of the world? If China has the same devastating information that we have on Global Warming, but is committing to no plan, and creating no incentive for change, will we, for the first time, realize the right thing to do first? Will our paranoia pay off?  


“Rising sea levels present China with ‘unimaginable challenges’ “

Fri Feb 16, 11:58 AM;_ylt=AvhxBvbWfm9A5Xn33qxCkWjPOrgF 

The Ice Age of 2012

12 02 2007

Every now and then, when listening to the new developments and dooms-day cries of Global Warming scientists and government officials, we hear of those in denial. I, along with many others, have always known of them, but never actually read or listened to their thoughts of government conspiracy and untrustworthy scientists. I have never felt compelled to read more about their ideas because I believe concretely in science and what it has to offer, and feel that those who chose not to listen to overwhelmingly accepted scientific theories as- both foolish and idiotic. Today, for the first time, I decided to research the idea that Global warming is just some made up theory. I found that my ideas were correct.

The blog I read was written by a man who had just recently felt compelled to read more information on the Global warming phenomenon of today. He wrote that while scientists today are nearly 90% sure of The Greenhouse effect being a main contributor to climate change and global warming, scientists have been 90% sure of other things which they have later been wrong about. “…scientists back in the 50’s were 90% sure that they could contain nuclear fusion in a safe manner….. try telling the residents of
Chernobyl that.”

Yes, this is true that scientists have been wrong before, but after years of compiling evidence across the globe, followed by numerous conferences, discussions, and data analysis, I believe that we can rely much on the theory that Global Warming does exist.

He provides the interesting theory that the sun fluctuates in cycles of more and less sun activity and intensity which can explain not only to why we have melting ice caps, but also to why we’ve had ice ages in the past. As the sun is overactive now, after 11 years, or in 2012, the sun will have a cooling period and mini ice age to balance its, what I would call, “temperature tantrum”. I do not admit to having enough information to disprove this theory of his, but I have yet to hear this suggestion within the media and text books. Even though I have not nearly enough knowledge on this subject, I doubt I’ll be buying a thicker coat to prepare for our mini ice age any time soon.




Monday February 12th 2007, 9:01 pm

Out of the box, on to the Moon

12 02 2007

It is easy to feel overwhelmed when trying to find a solution to the ever-growing, worldwide problem of global warming. Such a big problem needs time, money, and energy to be put into effect. It is difficult to find the most efficient way to tackle the problem, and the fact that we are running out of time to do so, is even more stress invoking. Even when a solution is found, the implementation will be a mix of helping the environment, while still trying to cause as little strain on the economy as possible. In the end we will still need to create revenue. Energy will always be needed, meaning that pollution will always be made. But what if we could eliminate pollution entirely? What if we could receive the energy without causing any harm to our planet? The closest way of doing this is examining the option one man proposes in his blog entitled, “Energy from the Moon”. Here he provides NASA’s testimony on an option that’s not only “out of the box,” but also out of this world.

The Moon has now become an option to saving the world of energy. This is why many countries are now in a race to the moon once again. The major powers such as China,Russia, and the U.S. could now be competing for this huge untapped source. NASA reports that there are, “two alternatives enabled by a lunar outpost :solar energy collected on the lunar surface and beamed back to Earth via microwaves, and the return to Earth of a light isotope of helium, He-3.” He-3, would help to present electrical power. To do this the He-3 would be, “used in fusion reactors here on Earth”. There are many logical reasons why these countries are willing to travel to the moon to get He3. The arguments provided are as follows:

  • It [He-3] is nearly absent from Earth as a natural resource  
  • Millions of kilograms of it are present in lunar soil, albeit at very low concentrations.  
  • It may be the fuel for the next generation of electric power plants, providing nearly         pollution-free power.
  • It may, in the 21st century, replace our dwindling supplies of fossil fuels.
  • It may be worth $2,000,000/kg.

Research is still being developed to make such incredible advances. Many scientists are proposing mobile minors to retrieve the He-3. And while scientists are researching on how to use this material, and the powers which fund them are racing to claim it, I can only wonder what repercussions there will be. I do understand that we have now realized an entirely new resource which could be the miracle we have all been waiting for, but it seems that we never fail to fall into the cycle of ignorance when we strike gold. Humans tend to become so overwhelmed with how to leap ahead of others to get and then claim new resources, that we often lose sight on how it may harm the balance of other things around us. It seems that humans are always a means to their end.

But this project could create even worse ramifications. We are no longer dealing with our own environment, but instead, now tampering with another key element to our solar system. What if this could cause problems within our solar system? I don’t know what bad can come from this, but I can only hope we look before we leap.


Technorati:Feb. 12Energy from the MoonAnonymous!67FF1AF236D8FB8D!1045.entry