Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
JAHpowElon will come up with something
buenoIndoor ski hills are the future
buenoIndoor ski hills are the future
Lonelyif you mean that they are large future contributors to emissions.... you would be correct
buenoThey’re gonna be all we got pretty soon
LonelyI sure hope not. I'd rather get back into skating and mountain biking.
If you think heli skiing is bad for the environment...constructing large amount of massive refrigerators, and keeping them running is comparably bad, if not worse. Let's just focus on making our current mountains more environmentally friendly before we start putting up ski dubais on every corner.
milk_manWhat I want to know is how much more effectively do plants grow and absorb CO2 when the CO2 level in the atmosphere is at the optimal level for plant growth. Currently the CO2 levels are far below the levels that would be optimal for plants
milk_manhttps://fifthseasongardening.com/regulating-carbon-dioxide
http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm
^^ Articles that reference increased plant growth with higher PPM of Co2. (Which would reduce the levels of co2 more quickly. More co2 available = more plant growth = more co2 converted into oxygen)
APfreeski4everybody just quit their jobs and plant trees, then go vegan, if my math is correct we should be gucci
evaroniGucci. I like gucci. I’ll plant a tree to get Gucci.
midwesternmaniacmy take is that the answer to our problems in the world (environment, peace, etc) are not political or technological. we need everyone to take steps as individuals. theres no technology or political move thats gonna change how things are, its gonna be the people. if one million people say fuck it in a day and throw a bag out the window thats one million bags out there decaying fucking the earth up, one million steps back. but if one million people decide to use less ____ and eat more sustain-ably/ do things that use less energy etc thats one million steps in the right direction you catch my drift?
The referenced post has been removed.
DirtYStylEGlobal Warming is such a fucking sham. The fact that it took 10 years to gain momentum is just outrageous. These are scientists telling us science and we ignore them.
Then again, I haven't seen any "solutions" that I can get behind. Yeah we know its real and its a threat, but what do we do now?
Is carbon the real issue?
Should I stop heating my home in the winter?
Eat less beef?
Stop breathing C02?
APfreeski4every millenial
GryllzGo drop a hello in the biggest lurker thread ;)
The referenced post has been removed.
midwesternmaniacwell yeah, but again, should we dwell on what cant be done or look to what can be done? youre right, theres some who can actually make those changes a outright and it would have to start there
J_SBoth in this thread and the vegan thread people like to hide behind the 'all or nothing' argument to justify their habits.
If I'm pissed about seeing trash in the lift line at my local resort, should I just throw some myself since I can't stop the others? It's all or nothing right?
midwesternmaniacI think the obvious answer is maybe pick some of that trash up , tell people not to do that , call people out if you see them doing that , and don't throw any yourself . Lead by example. The world needs more positive role models
J_SBoth in this thread and the vegan thread people like to hide behind the 'all or nothing' argument to justify their habits.
If I'm pissed about seeing trash in the lift line at my local resort, should I just throw some myself since I can't stop the others? It's all or nothing right?
milk_manI think the point is that even if you try to reduce your carbon footprint, you can only cut so many things out of your life. The only way to truly eliminate our carbon footprint is if we all give up our lifestyles and completely change the structure of our society. No more big cities, no more easy travel, no more comfortable living spaces.. Basically we need to go back 200 years if we want to eliminate the problem of carbon emissions. (Realistically and financially). Obviously one can dream of a world powered by renewable energy, but realistically the cost of this would destroy our economy and put us back 200 years anyway. So It's kind of a lose-lose.
TheDoughAbidesThe amount of latent heat required to produce one hurricane could supply the entire planet's energy demands for 200 years...
TheDoughAbidesThe amount of latent heat required to produce one hurricane could supply the entire planet's energy demands for 200 years...
RusticlesIt's not like the human race was going to continue forever. We are weak and fragile in the big picture.
The earth's population is exploding, It must be accepted that there is going to be some significant change with soon to be 9 billion people on the planet. We could really look at Global warming as a "culling of the herd".
That being said, nuclear power and Tesla's
RusticlesThat being said, nuclear power and Tesla's