TED2009: Al Gore

Al Gore is showing animation of the Arctic Ice cap. Over the last 25 years the permanent ice has diminished. A massive amount of frozen carbon is being released. In some shallow lakes in Alaska, methane is bubbling out of the water. He plays a video of a woman igniting methane coming out of an ice hole in a lake.

Ice in West Antarctica and Himalayas are rapidly melting.

California seeing a 40% decline in Sierra snow pack. Leading to dramatic increase in fires.

Ocean dead zones are growing.

Deforestation, coal, and oil are the main causes of global warming. Says there's no such thing as "clean coal" -- it's one of the main causes of global warming.

66

  1. Okay, okay…I love Al Gore. I really do. But he had eight years as Vice President to make an impact regarding global warming and he sat with his thumb up his ass, not doing a damn thing.

    I’m just saying.

  2. #1, your deep concern has been noted, and has been forwarded to the highest levels, where the swiftest & most appropriate action will be taken.

  3. #1: So, what the hell is a vice president supposed to do?

    I mean, a vice president operating within the law, not a power-mad goon like Cheney.

    #4: Greenhouse skeptics will rush to note that that’s likely a result of local deforestation.

    Which might well be true.

    But if you admit cutting down trees can cause a mountain to shed millenia old glaciers, you lose the right to blather about not being able to imagine humanity being able to effect the climate.

    1. Today is Al Gore day on Boing Boing!

      Al Gore (as an audience member) had the funniest comment at last year’s TED. Tony Robbins was talking about something along the lines of a personal nemesis and from the audience Al says, “the Supreme Court.”

  4. Perhaps we could delay this sort of news for some later date when most of the Northern Hemisphere isn’t digging out from record snowfall?

  5. Kullervo – Perhaps we could delay this sort of news for some later date when most of the Northern Hemisphere isn’t digging out from record snowfall?

    “Global Warming” means MORE weather, not exclusively WARMER weather. But you know that, and we both know you know that.

    But hey, consider the snowbanks as a temporary place to put your head until such a time as the sand-trap where you usually keep it is uncovered.

  6. #5: Why, there’s lots of things a Vice President can do without circumventing the chain of authority. For instance, maybe pull a Reverse Cheney and assemble an energy task force of the major players that meets to discuss and debate the problem, but be transparent and serious about it, etc..

    I don’t like Cheney any more than you do, but I have a grudging respect for him because he knew the smartest, fastest way of pushing his agenda. I respect anyone who understands power in those terms, even if I loathe their ultimate goals.

  7. Is there a link? The links provided go to other things though the YouTube video was neat. (I know that I can find this on TED2009 on my own, I’m just suggesting it for others.)

    @ kullervo — This white fluffy stuff that falls out of the sky… does it happen every six months or so? Perhaps we should give it a name… Hozabout “Winter”?

  8. Global warming is not as bad as nuclear waste from nuke plants if “we” go nuclear. Given all things break over time , radioactive waste will enter the environment . Rising sea levels can be coped with compared to radioactive waste in the water and soil.

  9. prepare for more extremes in your seasonal weather.
    After next year, anyone remarking on “how strange the weather is” will be shot.

  10. I wonder if he is still using his “the glaciers of greenland spill like blood into the ocean” line? I mean since their fast melt stopped and they have returned to pre-2000 levels.

  11. One argument I’m never crazy about in this debate is the one that references “record” conditions. We should keep in mind records are extremely new in geologic terms so their being broken is not terribly relevant. More compelling are samples taken that tie material content levels to atmospheric conditions at periods through history.

  12. Global warming is not as bad as nuclear waste from nuke plants if “we” go nuclear.

    Source?
    Since the only viable alternative to nuclear is coal, and coals releases more nuclear waste than nuclear (in addition to mercury and sulfur), I’d say that nuclear+solar+wind+hydro is the way to go.
    http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

    Given all things break over time , radioactive waste will enter the environment.

    Ok, let’s say that Yucca mountain ‘breaks’ (whatever that means).
    Then let’s compare that to carbon sequestration, which is a prerequisite of clean coal.
    Unlike radioactive waste, that becomes less dangerous over time, carbon dioxide will always be a greenhouse gas. (Sure, we can break carbon dioxide down to carbon and oxygen, but that takes more energy than we got from burning the carbon in the first place – so that’s not going to happen.)

  13. Mark PS2 – Global Warming is far worse.

    People may yet fight with nukes for vanishing land, so wouldn’t you rather fight vanishing land with nukes?

    Takuan – anyone remarking on “how strange the weather is” will be shot.

    It really is going to be forever, isn’t it?

  14. lv hw BB nvts Chrls Pltt t b gst blggr nd thn brs hs nt-glbl-wrmng psts wth ts wn ‘th c s mltng, rn fr th hlls’ hystr s fst s t cn. s Mr. Pltt pntd t, thr s n cnsnss thry/mdl n hw th rth’s clmt wrks r th fctrs tht ffct t nd hw thy rlt t th crrnt ‘wrmng trnd’ f th lst ffty yrs. Thr r t mny vrbls nd ‘ttrctrs’ -n wht s ssntlly chtc systm- fr crrnt scntfc nvstgtn t pnt fngr t n spcfc cs ntl lng ftr t hs ccrrd.

    Al Gore receives compensation from too many entities to be considered an objective spokesperson for anything. If you wish to accept what he has to say, fine, that’s your choice. Just remember that he has someone’s hand in his back when his mouth moves. If you really want to know who he speaks for, follow the money.
    Also, don’t be fooled by graphs that compress the passage of time in relation to temperature increases, because they artificially exaggerate the slope of the line -and therefore the severity of the problem. This is a technique that has been used by many who would use statistics to sway opinion in their favor. Don’t suspend your disbelief for a second until you have removed the shock value of what is being presented from your own perception.
    One last thing, if there was a volcanic eruption on the order of Mt. Tambora or larger -tomorrow- next year this time, everyone will have forgotten about ‘Global Warming’ and will be talking about how bloody cold it is in Miami and how high the price of oranges has gone.

      1. Stop.

        Mark’s threads on TED are not the appropriate place for discussion about posts from Cory, Xeni, Charles or anyone else. Thank you.

  15. I’d hate to be a downer, but the whole methane leaking out of lakes in Alaska is nothing new. it’s part of what happens when organic matter breaks down at the bottom of lake beds. Traditionally in the extreme cold in northern parts of Alaska, most of this is trapped down in the permafrost. Recently though, this layer has started to thaw, which is allowing this methane to escape, which causes things to heat up further, causing more of the permafrost to thaw, and release more methane. So basically, we’re all screwed.

  16. <>s Mr. Pltt pntd t, thr s n cnsnss thry/mdl n hw th rth’s clmt wrks r th fctrs tht ffct t nd hw thy rlt t th crrnt ‘wrmng trnd’ f th lst ffty yrs.

    s rcll, mst f Pltt’s sttmnts wr sndly dbnkd.
    lv hw pttng ‘wrmng trnd’ n nvrtd cmms mks t snd s f thr s n wrmng trnd.

    There are too many variables and ‘attractors’ -in what is essentially a chaotic system- for current scientific investigation to point a finger at one specific cause until long after it has occurred.

    So we should abandon scientific investigation of climate, because it is to complicated?

    Al Gore receives compensation from too many entities to be considered an objective spokesperson for anything. If you wish to accept what he has to say, fine, that’s your choice. Just remember that he has someone’s hand in his back when his mouth moves. If you really want to know who he speaks for, follow the money.

    Let’s, for the sake of this argument, say that Al Gore is a corrupt mouthpiece for some wast conspiracy.

    Does that mean that everything he says is false?
    Does that mean that the years of dedicated research and hard science performed by the world’s top climatologists is nothing but a bunch of lies?

  17. SPAZZM

    This is at least part of what can’t be relied on if Yucca Mountain* ‘breaks’. As far as I can tell the consensus is that it’s not the absolutely worst place one could bury nuclear waste. A LOT of people think it’s not one of the best places. I also totally agree the rest of what you said there, but let me be the first pedant to note:

    (Sure, we can break carbon dioxide down to carbon and oxygen, but that takes more energy than we got from burning the carbon in the first place – so that’s not going to happen.)

    Not without chlorophyll, anyhow.

    * – You know, “Yucca Mountain”, where they -actually- keep the Stargate. I bet you thought it was at NORAD! suckerz!

  18. Not without chlorophyll, anyhow.

    Chlorophyll requires energy to break down CO2 to carbon and oxygen – that’s why plants require sunshine to live.

  19. Also, don’t be fooled by graphs that compress the passage of time in relation to temperature increases, because they artificially exaggerate the slope of the line -and therefore the severity of the problem.

    The graph you linked to has a linear time axis.
    In other words, the century between 1000 and 1100 takes up just as much space on the axis as the century from 1900 to 2000.

    Or was your point that the a century should be longer? How long is an “uncompressed” century in your opinion? 200 pixels? 1000 pixels?

    Do you know anything about graphs and statistics?

  20. One last thing, if there was a volcanic eruption on the order of Mt. Tambora or larger -tomorrow- next year this time, everyone will have forgotten about ‘Global Warming’ and will be talking about how bloody cold it is in Miami and how high the price of oranges has gone.

    In other words: “Don’t worry about global warming, a volcano will save us.”

    Great.

  21. Spazzm – No no, I was agreeing with you. I was being a pedant because WE don’t have the engineering solution, but nature does.

    re: dmv’ing, that’s the best way to take it. 1 Adult beverage to you.

  22. “D y knw nythng bt grphs nd sttstcs?”

    D y? f y lk t grph whr tmprtr pprs t sht p nd dwn drmtclly d y thnk ths r grdl ncrss nd dcrss, vr ggntc spn f tm? r d y thnk “Ppl z wrmng d rf”?

  23. Do you? If you look at a graph where temperature appears to shoot up and down dramatically do you think those are gradual increases and decreases, over a gigantic span of time? Or do you think “Peepul iz warming da erf”?

    First I check to see what the independent and dependent variables are, then I look at the scale.

    But you know, I have the benefit of having finished 7th grade. Are you smarter than a 5th grader?

  24. Rlly? vn whn th tmprtr “nmly rng” s -1 t +0.6? Bcs th wy tht grph lks t m ppl z wrmng d rf! Rl bd t! hyck hyck.

  25. “Even when the temperature “anomaly range” is -1 to +0.6?”

    Are you saying that it should be -1 to +1?

    Your homework for tomorrow is to amend the graph to include this change, and post it here.

    Or are you saying that +0.6 degrees C (that’s 1.08 degrees F) is too small to matter? Well, good thing no glaciers are melting then, because that would refute your point.
    Ooops:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850

  26. the spread is 1.6 degrees C, which is more like 2 degrees F.

    One of my favorite old SimCity2000 sim-newspaper headlines was “Naysayers Say Nay”. Palindromic here is barely making an argument, just sorta flailing around with a piece of graph paper in his hand saying how scared he is and trying to mock others for caring about something he apparently does not comprehend and will not have explained to him. Ignorance is not always bliss.

  27. Did Al Gore really show this video of methane from a lake

    at TED 2009? Claiming it as evidence of MMGW?

    Did any of the geniuses in the audience question why they had to first drill a hole through the frozen ice surface of the lake?

    Methane is a natural product of decomposition.

  28. Word up, Al

    I voted for him, but ugh, every time I heard Obama say ‘clean coal’ I died a little inside.

  29. Look at this stupid graph…

    Yes, and notice how it stops in 1995 or so (the year the last research it is based on was published).

    That was 14 years ago.

  30. Is this the Al Gore that said, to a few thousand 12 year-olds that were in Washington D.C. for the inaguration:

    But I’m thinking back now a long way to when I was your age and the civil rights movement was unfolding. And we kids asked our parents and their generation, “Explain to me again why it’s okay for the law to officially discriminate against people because of their skin color.” And parents try to tell their kids the right thing, you know, usually. I do. And when our parents’ generation couldn’t answer that question, that’s when the law started to change. There are some things about our world that you know that older people don’t know. [emphasis added]

  31. No disrespect intended, but what is Antinous/Moderater doing telling people to,

    “Stop.

    Mark’s threads on TED are not the appropriate place for discussion about posts from Cory, Xeni, Charles or anyone else. Thank you.”

    in post #24

    and then in post #35 “Compose yourselves.”

    Also am I the only one that just can’t read the disemvoweling, and what is the purpose of that?

    1. flarbas,

      It’s unfair to Mark to drag arguments from other bloggers’ posts into his. If you have any more questions or comments, please go to the Moderation Policy linked at the top of the page.

  32. > #1: So, what the hell is a vice president
    > supposed to do?

    Look it up:

    nsf.gov – National Science Foundation (NSF) News –
    “The Navy has collected data for decades on ice thickness in the Arctic, … The area is known as the “Gore Box” for Vice President Al Gore’s initiative …”
    http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=102863

    http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_images.jsp?cntn_id=102863&org=NSF

    Press Release 98-006
    Newly Declassified Submarine Data Will Help Study of Arctic Ice

    Excerpt:

    A treasure-trove of formerly classified data on the thickness of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean, gathered by U.S. Navy submarines over several decades, is now being opened. Data from the first of approximately 20 cruise tracks — an April, 1992 trans-Arctic Ocean track — has just been released, and information from the rest of these tracks, or maps of a submarine’s route, will be analyzed and released over the next year-and-a-half.

    “The data opens up a magnificent resource for global change studies,” said Mike Ledbetter, National Science Foundation (NSF) program director for Arctic system science.

    Climate modellers differ over the fate of the great expanse of Arctic sea ice, which is about the size of the United States. More than half the ice melts and refreezes each year.

    “The Navy has collected data for decades on ice thickness in the Arctic, which was important to know for navigation and defense,” said Ledbetter. “But this information is also extremely important to science, now giving us a history of sea ice that we could not collect any other way.”

    “The data is essential to building a baseline of sea-ice thickness in the Arctic basin to examine how global change affects ice cover,” explained Walter Tucker of the U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Tucker is supported by NSF to process and analyze all digital ice-draft data collected by Navy submarines in the Arctic since 1986. The National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado-Boulder is handling the actual data release.

    The Arctic Submarine Laboratory, on behalf of the Chief of Naval Operations, approved declassifying the sea-ice data within a specific swath of the Arctic Ocean, roughly between Alaska and the North Pole. The area is known as the “Gore Box” for Vice President Al Gore’s initiative to declassify Arctic military data for scientific use….

  33. And (yes the original is all caps):
    http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/co2conference/transcripts/day1_gaffney.pdf
    VICE ADMIRAL GAFFNEY

    —–excerpt follows—–

    DATA COLLECTED BY SUBMARINES
    0187
    1 OVER DECADES INSIDE AN AREA CALLED THE GORE BOX —
    2 ISN’T THAT A STRANGE NAME? – THE US GOVERNMENT TOOK THE
    3 TIMES AND EXACT LOCATIONS OF THE SUBMARINES OFF THE DATA AND ONE
    4 STILL COMES UP WITH A VALUABLE DATA SET THAT PEOPLE
    5 ARE STILL ABLE TO USE TODAY. MOST OF THE
    6 NAVY’S HYDROGRAPHIC SECTIONS, TEMPERATURE, SALINITY, AND
    7 DEPTH, WERE DECLASSIFIED AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE
    8 PUBLIC. THERE WAS AN EXCHANGE BETWEEN THE RUSSIAN
    9 NAVY AND THE U.S. NAVY OF ALL OF THEIR RESPECTIVE ARCTIC
    10 DATA, METEOROLOGICAL, OCEANOGRAPHIC, AND ICE. THEY
    11 WERE MERGED INTO A SINGLE DATABASE AND MADE AVAILABLE
    12 TO ALL OF YOU, WHICHEVER COUNTRY YOU’RE FROM.
    13 AND MANY SCIENTISTS WERE CLEARED — NOT THOUSANDS — BUT
    14 TENS WERE CLEARED, GIVEN SECURITY CLEARANCES TO COME
    15 INSIDE THE CIA, INSIDE THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT, TO SEE
    16 ACTUALLY WHAT KIND OF DATA WE HAD AND WHAT KIND OF
    17 PROCESSES WE USED, AND WHAT KIND OF SENSORS WE HAD.
    18 THEY COULD NOT ONLY GIVE US ADVICE, BUT THEY COULD
    19 HELP US DETERMINE WAYS THAT THAT DATA MIGHT BE MADE
    20 AVAILABLE TO OTHERS WITHOUT COMPROMISING SECURITY.
    21 IT BROUGHT INCREDIBLY STRANGE PEOPLE TOGETHER.
    22 SENATOR GORE AND DIRECTOR OF CIA GATES STARTED THIS
    23 WHOLE PROCESS MORE THAN 10 YEARS AGO. AND THEN VICE PRESIDENT
    24 GORE SAID, IF I CAN WORK WITH THE CIA, HE SAID, THEN
    25 WHY CAN’T THE U.S. WORK WITH THE RUSSIANS TO TRY TO
    0188
    1 DO THE SAME KINDS OF THINGS. VERY SUCCESSFUL, IN MY
    2 OPINION.
    3 NOW, I WASN’T ON THE OSCAR SELECTION
    4 COMMITTEE OR THE NOBEL PRIZE PANEL, BUT I’LL TELL YOU
    5 WHAT, THIS PARTICULAR CONTRIBUTION BY SENATOR AND
    6 VICE PRESIDENT GORE, GETTING THE DEFENSE AND
    7 INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MOBILIZED TO PROVIDE ITS
    8 TALENT TO THE WORLD SCIENTISTS WAS A GREAT THING, IN
    9 MY OPINION …

  34. I have discovered a truly marvellous way of solving the problem of global warming, which this comment-space is too small to contain.

  35. And there’s more:
    http://www.nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g01360_upward_looking_sonar/index.html

    “This data set consists of upward looking sonar draft data collected by submarines in the Arctic Ocean. It includes data from both U.S. Navy and Royal Navy submarines. Maps showing submarine tracks are available. Data are provided as ice draft profiles and as statistics derived from the profile data. Statistics files include information concerning ice draft characteristics, keels, level ice, leads, un-deformed and deformed ice. …
    … U.S. Navy guidance has stated that previously classified, submarine-collected ice draft data may be declassified and released according to set guidelines. Those guidelines include restrictions stating that positions of the data must be rounded to the nearest 5 minutes of latitude and longitude, and date is to be rounded to the nearest third of a month. The guidelines also specify a region in which the data may be released. The Chief of Naval Operations has expanded the release area beyond the original “Gore Box” (so called because of Vice President Gore’s advocacy for releasing the data). See the map below (click on the image to see the full size map)….”

    http://www.nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g01360_upward_looking_sonar/images/subboxes.gif

  36. “Global warming is not as bad as nuclear waste from nuke plants if “we” go nuclear.”

    Oh that’s bullshit and you either know it or should know it. I’m not even going to argue with you: do some damn research.

    We “went nuclear” three decades back: those facilities provide 20% of our power. With sensible deployment, we could have 99% of of our power from zero pollution, zero emission plants within a decade. Grow up and learn a little science.

  37. Thank you, MDH, for knowing that I know that. Might be the first time I’ve been given the benefit of the doubt on the Internet!

  38. “Over the last 25 years the permanent ice has diminished. A massive amount of frozen carbon is being released.”

    So, if global warming was caused by something other than carbon, then temperature/carbon levels would line up anyway, as rising temperatures create carbon?

  39. @ Spassm

    You want the source on Greenland, well it sure isn’t the often erroneous wikipedia. How about the latest issue of Science?

    As Richard Kerr reported in the January 23 issue of Science:

    So much for Greenland ice’s Armaggedon. “It has come to an end,” glaciologist Tavi Murray of Swansea University in the United Kingdom said during a session at the meeting. “There seems to have been a synchronous switch-off” of the speed-up, she said. Nearly everywhere around southeast Greenland, outlet glacier flows have returned to the levels of 2000…

  40. Keep moving folks. Nothing to see here. The glacier’s just fine. Move along…

    Some glaciers just can’t seem to get with the program:
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090129090002.htm

    Lose weight without even moving! Ask me how!
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081215091015.htm

    “Loss of ice” is, like, totally different than “outlet glacier flows”, so, like, whatever…
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070530132357.htm

    Hmmm…. Heat causes melting! Could this weird phenomena be significant?
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080115102706.htm

    Evil thermohaline circulation corrupting our impressionable ocean currents. If the Younger Dryas jumped off a cliff would you do it too?
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080612090919.htm

    Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080831151346.htm
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071210094332.htm

    And back to Al Gore:

    Marge: We wouldn’t be in this trouble if you’d just pay the heating bill.
    Homer: I thought Global Warming would take care of it. Al Gore can’t do anything right!

    Krusty: Go to my joke file and make all the Sophia Lorens into Lindsay Lohans.
    Lisa: So, do a global change?
    Krusty: What am I, Al Gore? Just do it.

    En Español!

  41. @#57 Tharklord,

    Is that post supposed to be directed at me, because I could have sworn that I only mentioned the glaciers of greenland and Gore’s flow like blood statement. And I never denied anything else about global warming. Or is it just a matter of, “question a prophet be guilty of heresy”?

  42. RE: Dimmer and “zero pollution”
    Right you define what pollution is
    you tell me there can never be accidents, never a stuck or broken valve, never incompetence or fatigue in workers,and you define the cost of holding nuclear waste to the end of time as low.

  43. and you define the cost of holding nuclear waste to the end of time as low.

    “low” compared to what? the cost of photovoltaics?

    thirty grand would put some photovoltaics on my roof, and I’d get about 1 kilowatt hour per day out of it. the panels last about 25 years. that’s about 10,000 days. that’s three dollars a kilowatt.

    And I can’t power my house with magical, some-day, one-day, solar panels that generate electricity cheaper than nuclear, but don’t exist yet.

    We ought to be putting research into solar and wind and other forms of clean power. But until those kinds of power are developed, we need to plan and design our power based on what actually exists.

  44. http://www.sierraclub.org/rcc/midwest/polluted_power.asp

    Coal power plants are the largest industrial source of cancer-causing pollution in the Midwest, responsible for 51% of the total emissions.

    http://www.citizen.org/texas/Dereg/coalplants/

    Health Impacts of Emissions from Current Coal-Fired Power Plants in Texas (not the US, just the state of Texas):

    * Health Statistics
    Deaths 1,160 per year
    Heart Attacks 1,791 per year
    Lung Cancer Deaths 144 per year
    Asthma Attacks 33,987 per year
    Hospital Admissions 1,105 per year
    Asthma ER Visits 1,796 per year

    The coal plants in the state of texas alone kill one thousand people EVERY YEAR, and you want to invoke the nuclear boogeyman?

  45. RE :solar from Greglondon
    The amount of electricity you get from solar panels on a house, is a combo of how many panels you can put on the roof, and how much sun your area receives.
    The money is NOT going out of the country every week/month to Iran or whatever.

    Or it could be a wind to electricity on the roof

    re:valves
    http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/02/04/discovery-delay.html
    “Valve concerns push back space shuttle launch”

    Valves never break or get stuck oh yeah.

    re:cost
    “Decommissioning Britain’s growing radioactive waste mountain is likely to cost the taxpayer £12bn more than previous highest estimates…
    are expected to reach £73bn but could go higher.”

  46. The amount of electricity you get from solar panels on a house, is a combo of how many panels you can put on the roof, and how much sun your area receives.

    Uh, yeah, I spent quite a bit of time looking into putting real live solar panels on my house last year. I figured out how many would fit, how much it would cost, and based on how much sun we get where I live, how much electricity it would produce.

    thirty thousand dollars would buy panels that would produce about 1 kilowatt hour a day for about ten thousand days.

    These were real numbers based off of the best and cheapest manufacturer I could find and based off of their own estimates for how long the panels would last and how much power they would produce. I got approximately the same numbers for power output from other manufacturers, but higher costs.

    three dollars a kilowatt hour is what real solar power produces right now.

    The money is NOT going out of the country every week/month to Iran or whatever.

    Get your facts right. most of our electricity is from coal, not oil.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sources_of_electricity_in_the_USA_2006.png

    and the US has plenty of coal in America. We don’t need to import it from anywhere.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal#World_coal_reserves

    Good ol-fashioned American mined cancer producing coal.

    Valves never break or get stuck oh yeah.

    Enough fear mongering. You’re beloved coal plants shorten the lives of tens of thousands of americans every year. I don’t give a damn about your stupid “valve”, I’m talking about real flesh and blood people being killed.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5174391/

    Decommissioning Britain’s growing radioactive waste mountain is likely to cost

    How many gigawatt hours did you get out of that radioactive waste? In the US, nuclear plants generate 100,000 megawatts of power every hour, 20% of the total US power requirements.

    two studies have reported that the cost per kilowatt hour of from nuclear power would be 6 or 7 cents a kilowatt hour. Another study said it would be more like 25 to 30 cents per kilowatt hour.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_new_nuclear_power_plants#Cost_per_kWh

    Which is still way cheaper than three dollars a kilowatt hour I was going to get from a real, actual, piece of hardware almost put on my roof.

  47. #56 posted by Takuan , February 5, 2009 10:36 AM

    “I can show you sources of information, I can’t make you think.”

    Typical ad hominem response.

    http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/2487/carbondioxidegeologicalts8.jpg

    Both CO2 and temperature show huge natural variation long before long before humans appeared.

    CO2 and temperature show next to no correlation.

    Much of the world’s coal deposits are the remains of massive forests that flourished when both CO2 and temperature levels were much higher than today. Plants thrive at higher CO2 levels as any greenhouse or grow-op operator would tell you.

    I think that you need to work on the thinking part.

  48. Pebble Bed Reactors.

    Within a public safety margin – Valves can stick, stuff can escape, or you could hit it with a missile and it would be less nasty than spilling a big oil tank over. Yes a mess, but not a Chernobyl.

    Of course, you can’t make fission weapons or medical isotopes in a pebble-bed reactor, but you CAN make power without the degree of danger the old style reactors pose.

Comments are closed.