Comments on: IEA Report: Natural Gas Is Not The Answer To Climate Problem, Existing Cleantech Is — And It Could Save $100 Trillion By 2050

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 19:35:00 +0000

If we actually have until 2050 to avoid the worst, then I think most of us make it. Sure, millions or tens of millions will get wiped out by drought and extreme weather events but most will squeak by.

The worse the weather gets, the more pressure will be applied to get off fossil fuels. And as we watch that pressure rise we will have better and cheaper technology working to bring down the cost of transitioning off fossil fuels.

My fear is that we don’t have until 2050. We keep finding new feedbacks/accelerators that are kicking in.

—

“Vast stores of carbon in U.S. forest soils could be released by rising global temperatures, according to a study by UC Irvine and other researchers in a recent online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“We found that decades-old carbon in surface soils is released to the atmosphere faster when temperatures become warmer,””The scientists found that heating soil in Wisconsin and North Carolina woodlands by 10 and 20 degrees increased the release of carbon dioxide by up to eight times. They showed for the first time that most carbon in topsoil is vulnerable to this warming effect.”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120611193701.htm

By: Shecky Vegas

Shecky Vegas — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 18:55:00 +0000

I hate to say it, but I don’t think it’s gonna happen. Let’s face it – people are generally stupid and greedy. Those with knowledge and foresight will always be outnumbered by those more content holding their dicks.

It will only be when a massive calamity, so huge and unnerving, so mountainous and terrible, will the mass of people get off their collective asses and stop listening to those in power who are only looking out for their own, greedy self-interest.

Even John Cusack ain’t gonna save us from this one. We all gonna die.

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 12:44:00 +0000

Good call. I am certainly getting tired of hearing people say, “It’s natural!”

By: Captivation

Captivation — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 05:09:00 +0000

If Frank Lutz gets to rename Global Warming into Climate Change, then why don’t we rename Natural Gas back into Methane? After all, the whole ‘natural’ thing gives a false impression of cleanness.

By: Ross

Ross — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 04:26:00 +0000

That report sounds like a great read I look forward to its publication.

By: dennis baker

dennis baker — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 02:02:00 +0000

Existing Cleantech Is …………
you discount what you don’t own?
The solution to climate changeThe primary source of GHG is fossil fuel burning electrical generating facilities. http://dingo.care2.com/pictures/causes/uploads/2012/01/GHG-emitters-2010.jpg 7 Billion humans generate vast quantities of excrement. I believe this excrement is capable of providing all human electrical demands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiolysis Right now hydrogen is perceived as a negative by product, of Nuclear Energy, when it should be the product, as the Pentagon has considered. reference info Request for Information (RFI) on Deployable Reactor Technologies … DARPA-SN-10-37@darpa.milhttps://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=d0792af88a6a4484b3aa9d0dfeaaf553&…Large scale conversions sites are intended to replace fossil fuel powered electrical facilities the Primary Source of Carbon Emissions.http://www.populist.com/99.12.krebs.blob.htmlIn what officials now say was a mistaken strategy to reduce the waste’s volume, organic chemicals were added years ago which were being bombarded by radiation fields, resulting in unwanted hydrogen. The hydrogen was then emitted in huge releases that official studies call burps, causing “waste-bergs,” chunks of waste floating on the surface, to roll over.Dennis Baker 106-998 Creston AvenuePenticton BC V2A1P9cell phone 250-462-3796 Phone / Fax 778-476-2633 dennisbaker2003@hotmail.com@dennisearlbaker