• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

What to do about air pollution?

leftrightleftrightleft

Well-Known Member
Jul 14, 2009
2,644
363
Canada
✟45,486.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
What are people's ideas for what we should do about the billions of tons of carbon dioxide and other gases that humans are releasing into the atmosphere each year?

Should we do something to try to stop it? What is the best way to try to stop it? What are your ideas that could be most effective and realistic?

Should we not do anything to stop it and continue as we are? For how long and to what point?

Is it logical to conclude that billions of tons of new substance in the atmosphere has no effect on Earth's interrelated systems and biosphere?
 

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟127,077.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Should we not do anything to stop it and continue as we are? For how long and to what point?

You could shut down the coal fired power stations, and build nuclear power stations, which is what the British Government is planning on doing. But it goes without saying that the environmentalists are not going to be too happy about that either.
 
Upvote 0

mafwons

Hi guys
Feb 16, 2014
2,740
169
✟33,677.00
Faith
Non-Denom
What are people's ideas for what we should do about the billions of tons of carbon dioxide and other gases that humans are releasing into the atmosphere each year?

Should we do something to try to stop it? What is the best way to try to stop it? What are your ideas that could be most effective and realistic?

Should we not do anything to stop it and continue as we are? For how long and to what point?

Is it logical to conclude that billions of tons of new substance in the atmosphere has no effect on Earth's interrelated systems and biosphere?

Consume less.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
You could shut down the coal fired power stations, and build nuclear power stations, which is what the British Government is planning on doing. But it goes without saying that the environmentalists are not going to be too happy about that either.

Nuclear is the way to go. Modern reactors are extremely safe, and new reactors produce very little waste. 80% of France's power is nuclear, and their waste fits into a single building, and not even that big of a building. They have had zero problems.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
Consume less.

If we consume 30% less, those savings go away in about one generation because population will increase by 30%. Even if population stays the same, as new countries begin to develop and use electricity, those savings go right away.

The only way to reduce carbon emissions is to change the way we produce electricity.
 
Upvote 0

mafwons

Hi guys
Feb 16, 2014
2,740
169
✟33,677.00
Faith
Non-Denom
If we consume 30% less, those savings go away in about one generation because population will increase by 30%. Even if population stays the same, as new countries begin to develop and use electricity, those savings go right away.

The only way to reduce carbon emissions is to change the way we produce electricity.

If we are only consuming 30% in excess of our need I'd be suprised I'd say its more on the order of 90% but lets go with your figure 30% less for a generation is 30% that has to help. I agree with changing the way we make electricity, I think solar is the way to go not nuclear, but I have heated with wood most of my life and would love to see steam generation via renewable bio fuels at a residential level, this is not only carbon negative, but cost effective as well. I also have always burnt my garbage and I feel that we could generate energy by burning garbage, another carbon negative and cost effective way to go, in fact most winters I burn all paper based refuse in my woodburner or fireplace.
 
Upvote 0

Paulos23

Never tell me the odds!
Mar 23, 2005
8,491
4,862
Washington State
✟397,524.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Nuclear is the way to go. Modern reactors are extremely safe, and new reactors produce very little waste. 80% of France's power is nuclear, and their waste fits into a single building, and not even that big of a building. They have had zero problems.

France is switching from nuclear to solar and wind as I understand it. Still, nuclear would be the quick way to get us off coal for a generation and let solar, wind, and other clear sources of energy develop.
 
Upvote 0