"Someone in a garage" will fix climate change...

[Willtor]

We should take that step while the geniuses figure out the rest.

Haha! We could do both right now. If we built out a massive fission infrastructure, the second is something we could do easily. It also has the side benefit of creating an energy infrastructure that can sustain our society and other societies that are developing right now (and who want to use fossil fuels because they're cheap).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Haha! We could do both right now. If we built out a massive fission infrastructure, the second is something we could do easily. It also has the side benefit of creating an energy infrastructure that can sustain our society and other societies that are developing right now (and who want to use fossil fuels because they're cheap).

I agree, as long as the waste products don't pose a danger. It still takes many years to bring a nuke facility on line.

 

[The Cadet]

The reality is that the climate has always changed and always will.

The reality is that people have always died and always will. This does not mean that we should not be concerned about the staggering death rates in those camps in Poland.

 

[Willtor]

I agree, as long as the waste products don't pose a danger. It still takes many years to bring a nuke facility on line.

Modern nuclear doesn't generate very much waste, and most of the waste it generates doesn't last so long it needs to be put in some geologically stable place. They have better fuel cycles, now, than they had in the 1940's and 1950's, and the modern designs are more efficient than the old ones. Safety (the other thing that concerns most neighbors of nuclear plants) has been the object of a change in design philosophy since the old plants were built.

The old ones operated on making sure failures never happened (or were incredibly unlikely). Of course, failures happen from time to time. The new designs try to make sure that failures don't happen, but the new philosophy is that if a failure happens, it's a headache rather than a hazard. The plant fails into a safe configuration using passive systems based on physics. In old plants, if humans were taken out of the picture (the reactor loses power), the reactor would remain critical and continue to heat up (meltdowns, explosions, etc.). In new designs, if humans are removed, the reaction can't sustain itself and it stops.

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

The economic reality at the moment is that the only companies capable of mitigating climate change are energy producers. If anyone is going to have a go at it it'll be them. I don't think they can fix the problem and I don't think governments will, I've entirely given up on the issue; humans are stupid and we're probably going to drive ourselves into extinction. Climate change isn't the end of all life on earth just the majority of it, so who knows, beings living tens of millions of years in the future may be using our bioremains as combustible fuel.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The economic reality at the moment is that the only companies capable of mitigating climate change are energy producers. If anyone is going to have a go at it it'll be them. I don't think they can fix the problem and I don't think governments will, I've entirely given up on the issue; humans are stupid and we're probably going to drive ourselves into extinction. Climate change isn't the end of all life on earth just the majority of it, so who knows, beings living tens of millions of years in the future may be using our bioremains as combustible fuel.

Actually those who produce the products that use fuel are in the best position to cut energy use. Sadly they often don't. A case in point are cheap, inefficient water heaters still being manufactured that should have been mandated out of existence decades ago. The list of similar products is as long as your arm. Another culprit is the power companies. They have the means to greatly reduce energy-from-fossil-fuel use, but they place profits above progress. We don't suffer so much from lack of good technology but from ignorance and greed.

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

Actually those who produce the products that use fuel are in the best position to cut energy use. Sadly they often don't. A case in point are cheap, inefficient water heaters still being manufactured that should have been mandated out of existence decades ago. The list of similar products is as long as your arm. Another culprit is the power companies. They have the means to greatly reduce energy-from-fossil-fuel use, but they place profits above progress. We don't suffer so much from lack of good technology but from ignorance and greed.

I agree, and it's all our greed. We want society, we want capitalism, we want convenience and the result is climate change. We're not going to stop and they're not going to stop, so we deserve the results, we reap what we've sown.