The point I was trying to make was, in all these previous situations, the end/problems have been coming, and we took steps to prevent them, directly and indirectly, and in doing so, kept on going. However, there have been times we have only just caught it, and failing to do so could have lead to problems. For ex: Hole in the ozone was a disaster that was beginning to happen by the time we noticed, and we were lucky we managed to stop further growth of it, but even so, New Zealand and Australia are still paying the price in terms of skin cancer. Had we ignored the problem, it is possible the rest of the world would now be suffering high skin cancer rates too, and plants which rely on uv sensitive bacteria, such as some rices, may have had issues.
For the CO2 and pop levels, im not sure, but could hazard a guess or two: improved building methods, imrpoved factory recycling of waste gas, replacement of old industry equipment after hurricanes, more polluting industry moving out, all sorts of reasons.
Unfortunately, our govt doesnt believe too much in globabl warming, or the aphormism that you cant have gain without pain, and arent really focusing on any industry policy that may cause short term problems for long term gain. However, in spite of this, we are looking at meeting a target of 5% below 1990 levels of emissions, and still having surplus CO2 credits from prior to 2013 equivalent to about a full years production under the Kyoto agreement. We could do better, i just dont expect it to happen for at least another election cycle.
Energy footprint of my pc? gaming or non gaming? Non gaming, about the same as yours, currently using 15w on the overclocked and overvolted cpu, so if i drop it back to stock, this would drop, plus another 10-15w for the overvolted gpu, and 25 to 30 for the screen according to its specs. Gaming, when I do have time, about 400w to 450w. Planning on upgrading it this year with newer, faster and more efficient parts, so that should drop by 50w or so.
My laptop is about 15 to 20w when i use it, as it lasts about 3 hours or so on a 45whr battery.
My car I have is a bit more fuel efficient than my first one, the first being about 29mpg, and the second 33-34mpg. I plan to upgrade to a newer car with even better efficiency when this one is past its usability date, as its creeping up towards 15 years old now, and its becoming a bit worn.
I also carpooled through Uni, my girlfriend takes public transport, I use low energy bulbs, Use blankets as opposed to a heater, and have multiple houses in my family runnign solar, both power and for hot water. I may not know my footprint size, But every year i help decrease it.....
thinkstoomuch wrote:
I really do think we are not communicating well. Forest and tress problem maybe. I meant to be pointing out that scientists have been predicting the end is neigh, might as well be preachers, for the most part for quite a while. Might talk about nuclear winter as well. Yet we are still here. But if you want collection plate filled ...
Post rambles my apologies.
How many farmers did the west put out of business in Africa by offering free food. Kind of hard to compete with free. Same problem I have with the various US farm aid bills. Pay people not to grow stuff and such. Though there does need to be regulation about down stream affects. The US is mandated 10% food into my gas to save the environment making a worse mess of the Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico.
But we still have 53 years of oil left. Something like 20 years after we were supposed to run out. Guess that will solve the oil part of the CO2 emissions.
Why are we using less today than we did then? Technology had nothing to do with it? Did you happen to look at that last post of mine. Florida whose population grew by ~22% is emitting 9.1% less CO2 than it did in 2000. Why is that? Technology wouldn't have a thing to do with it.
California, with tree hugging culture and government intervention, did alright they reduced CO2 output by 7.5% yet their population only grew by 14%.
Florida has its share of climate deniers and greenies managed much better results.
How is New Zealand doing compared to 2000?
For that matter how many people actually measure their carbon footprint? My house around 1.5 tons a year. My ~50 mpg vehicle (using 80's tech if you are generous) 322 gallons of gas to go 16+k miles. Not so good ~3.15 tons. According to the EIA. http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11 Of course if we count that food we put in the tank it goes down by 2 pounds a gallon. Or the fact of a new car costs as much to produce as for one year of operation. My vehicle is 8 years old. Average greenie I don't know but seems a lot less and gets less fuel mileage from what I have observed.
Of course it could be as was pointed on Energy Matters a good economic depression is a great way to save CO2 as well. <shrug>
Have fun,
T2M
PS Random stray thought how many people have been killed installing solar panels. Wonder how that compares to people killed in Nuclear plant accidents. Might have to look that up.
As long as she has her comforts and someone else pays for it. She probably could paid for that solar system by buying an more economical vehicle and made more money many ways, fuel mileage, cost of ownership, not mention the energy expended in producing the dinosaur.