hi see this thx fileporn

hi see this thx fileporn

The low vote and comment count indicate a high level of disinterest in, or apathy about, global warming. I suppose it will take crop failures, the prospect of famine, and inflationalry pressures in wealthy nations to spur public support of the issue - but then it may be too late.

Not all nuclear reactors are created equal. Dr. Alvin Weinberg invented our current nuclear reactor designs, yet he realized their limitations and flaws, and spent the rest of his life developing a far better design. The Liquid Fluoride Molten Salt Reactor can burn all it's fuel, and thereby produces no waste to be stored in Yucca Mountain, no plutonium for bombs and is meltdown proof. This was invented right here in the USA, at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Yet, for all his efforts working the kinks out of the design, almost no effort has been made since to develop it commercially.

More details can be found here if anyone is interested in a real solutions to fossil fuel use, resource wars, and global warming.

http://home.earthlink.net/~bhoglund/multiMissionMSR.html

Liquid Fluoride Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) Invented in the USA in 1954
Not yet commercialized, even after 2 successful MSRs were built & operated
Meltdown proof
Does not produce weapons grade plutonium
Has inherent nonproliferation features
Thousands of years of energy
Its wastes are simpler and less toxic than current nuclear wastes
Only hundreds of years of storage versus thousands for the current wastes
Can burn the existing wastes (spent fuel)!

http://thoriumenergy.blogspot.com

Not all nuclear reactors are created equal. Dr. Alvin Weinberg invented our current nuclear reactor designs, yet he realized their limitations and flaws, and spent the rest of his life developing a far better design. The Liquid Fluoride Molten Salt Reactor can burn all it's fuel, and thereby produces no waste to be stored in Yucca Mountain, no plutonium for bombs and is meltdown proof. This was invented right here in the USA, at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Yet, for all his efforts working the kinks out of the design, almost no effort has been made since to develop it commercially.

More details can be found here if anyone is interested in a real solutions to fossil fuel use, resource wars, and global warming.

http://home.earthlink.net/~bhoglund/multiMissionMSR.html

Liquid Fluoride Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) Invented in the USA in 1954
Not yet commercialized, even after 2 successful MSRs were built & operated
Meltdown proof
Does not produce weapons grade plutonium
Has inherent nonproliferation features
Thousands of years of energy
Its wastes are simpler and less toxic than current nuclear wastes
Only hundreds of years of storage versus thousands for the current wastes
Can burn the existing wastes (spent fuel)!

http://thoriumenergy.blogspot.com

You left out the choice "Do nothing because climate change is part of a natural cycle that has been going on for millions of years and man has no control over the weather." Just wait 10 years and the post will be reprinting the 1970's articles about the coming ice age.
But if somebody does have scientific proof man is causing global warming the people at www.junkscience.com are offering a $125,000 prize for the proof. Computer models with fudged data doesn't count as proof.

None of these proposals seems to take the urgency of the situation into account.
1. Use Formulas: fair indeed, but expect fifty years of negotiations.
2. Strengthen Kyoto just a teensy weensy bit: too little, too late.
3. Climate Clubs: unfair (and the unfairness argument will be used to do nothing, as has been the case for the past 15 years).
4, 5 and 6: more excuses to do nothing (our creativity in that regard is unlimited).

What has to be done NOW is a total, immediate and worldwide ban on new coal-fired plants; a total, immediate and worldwide ban on forest destruction; the creation of a carbon tax on international trade and travel (at present exonerated from any tax whatsoever); the whole in addition to a strengthened Kyoto.

And that's for starters.

Clearly the evolutionary experiment by Mother for the species, Homo Saps, is a failure! The affects on bio-diversity alone of this parasitic species is condemning. Now they appear to be headed to Global extinction that may take several billion years to remedy. There is a particular virulent form in most of North America that has spread to all corners of the planet. This group is responsible for the quantum acceleration of the species extinction time line and there appears to be no methodology to contain the affects of this infection that is rapidly infecting most of the species members. The host planet is rapidly approaching numerous critical thresholds where the inflammation will be self perpetuating leading to a complete collapse of species environmental niche. The current generations of this species may very well be the last!

The proposed options are neither creative nor representative of where the world is right now (aside from the options which largely mirror existing Kyoto obligations).

The Bali Roadmap itself is more ambitious than many of these proposals, many of which are dependent upon voluntary decisions by countries to reduce emissions. If the past experience has taught us anything, it's that voluntary emisisons reductions won't get us where we need to be to avoid a planetary crisis.

Three additional proposals that should be on the table:
1) Carbon tax (economists' favorite that has been pronounced DOA due to perceived lack of political viablity--it would be quite informative to include this in a public opinion poll).
2) Emerging from Bali as a priority for developing countries: incentive payments (beyond cap and trade) to facilitate technological shifts to low-carbon development pathways for developing countries.
3) Adaptation funding (to developing countries unable to adapt to the unavoidable consequences of climate change): link some portion of funding assistance with national commitments to keep future emissions levels within reasonable limits.

I say that these are very strange choices. I don't really understand some of them. But you know, at some point, people will get alarmed and demand something be done. It will either be soon, and we will solve the problem or it will be too late. I don't understand how people can ignore science and keep saying there is no problem when everyday the scientists are more alarmed by the speed up of the warming that is happening. I say the most effective response for those trying to change public opinion is to target mothers. Once mothers understand what the consequences are for their children and grandchildren, all hell will break loose. Right now mothers are confused by corporate propaganda. Get mothers to grasp the urgency and the problem will get tackled. I want a future for my children. If we don't get ourselves going, there won't be a future worth living.

Only a solution that requires a reduction in CO2s has any chance to work. And, unfortunately, I really don't see that happening in any meaningful way. Maybe -- but only when it is too late.

I agree the proposals are poorly worded. For those of us who believe the time for governments to be bargaining about what to do is long long past don't have anything to select. The time for such quibbling measures is long past. I really didn't find anything worth selecting.

I agree also with the poster who noted that some of the proposals are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

I'm so embarassed by my country's actions in the recent climate conference.

In my opinion, 100 years from now they won't talk about Bush's misadventure in Iraq. What folks will talk about is why didn't do anything about climate change when he had the chance? Such politicians are dooming themselves to be cursed by their descendants.

Very poorly written question. Your proposals in the voting section don't quite track to what is presented in the results. Furthermore they are not mutually exclusive. I pressed multiple approaches without realizing it was only a slightly stronger version of countries going it alone.