21–30 of 198 posts
Why wouldn’t people think this is a serious idea?? We can make far safer zeppelins with current technology even if we use H2 gas. And when you’re using it for something mundane like cargo instead of human recreational activity it’s a no brainer.
All air travel combined emits 2.5% of our yearly CO2 emissions. That’s hundreds of thousands of flights a day. We could just eliminate all coal electric plants in the world and make a real impact. Then use that cleaner energy to power our electric cars.
But eliminating all coal plants in the world is not feasible in the short term. Germany tried it a while back. Turns out that some days are too dark to catch enough sunlight. Turns out that sometimes the wind doesn't blow.
Then you'd have to restart the coal plants again because they are reliable sources of energy.
Or we should consider going nuclear. Which makes perfect sense in regions like Europe where there is hardly any danger of earth quakes and tsunamis.
But Europe has bad memories of that because of outdated tech in eastern Europe going haywire.
It'll take another generation or so to get to the point where we can shut down coal plants.
All air travel combined emits 2.5% of our yearly CO2 emissions. That’s hundreds of thousands of flights a day. We could just eliminate all coal electric plants in the world and make a real impact. Then use that cleaner energy to power our electric cars.
Anybody who eats meat should not preach what to do.
And should.
Seven days from Dallas to China? How is this considered a serious alternative to current planes?
Better idea ultra high speed megascale nuclear powered cruise ships that never dock. They pull in 1 km from port and use deckside drones to transport tens of thousands of passengers safely on shore in different places all at once or as needed. Speed should reach at least 150mph. And with nuclear power become the domina t coastal form of circuit/belt transport. Not just people but cargo. Nuclear powered merchant marin…
All air travel combined emits 2.5% of our yearly CO2 emissions. That’s hundreds of thousands of flights a day. We could just eliminate all coal electric plants in the world and make a real impact. Then use that cleaner energy to power our electric cars.
Except we're not demi-Gods, able to decide what to do at will with the entire planet. Pursuing some serious efforts in one area can't be turned down simply because there's something else that could be done in another area.
In fact, people who actively shame others for eating meat, having vacations, and raising kids, are doing exactly that. Except, instead of optimizing the ecological impact, they optimize their own emotional return through gaining influence over others, similar to religious missionaries.
I think, for everyone who actually wants to solve the climate change problem, being honest about their goals could be a good starting point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except we're not demi-Gods, able to decide what to do at will with the entire planet. Pursuing some serious efforts in one area can't be turned down simply because there's something else that could be done in another area.
On the contrary, the rational way of solving a complex problem that cannot be addressed entirely is to break it down into smaller ones, estimate their individual cost/impact/risk and start with the most cost-effective options. In fact, people who actively shame others for eating meat, having vacations, and raising kids, are doing exactly that. Except, instead of optimizing the ecological impact, they optimize their o…