taerowyn: (Sloppy Faith)
[personal profile] taerowyn
I try to keep my preachiness on environmental issues to a minimum. Most of you know me well enough to know where I stand on these kind of things. But today, due to a confluence of events, I can't help but get on the soapbox for a moment.

This week, the Center for American Progress released The Top 100 Effects of Global Warming. Just a few of the things mentioned:

Say Farewell to Glaciers
Say Goodbye to the Great Barrier Reef
A New Dust Bowl
Death in the Time of Cholera
Death March of the Penguins
Say Goodbye to Discoveries of Sharks That Can Walk
Say Goodbye to Baseball
Say Hello to More Mosquitoes

 
If there's not something on this list that strikes a cord with you, I...I'm not sure what that will actually mean, but nothing good.

This is real folks. It's happening. It's not an if, it's a when, and in some cases that when is right the fuck now.

We're talking whole countries disappearing in the the next 30 to 50 years. Let me repeat that...an entire country is going to DISAPPEAR in your lifetime!

The time for heads in the sand, ignorance is bliss, is it real or not, is it humanity's fault or not, complacency is over. The time to act is now.

The top 100 list is scary, scary shit...and the depressing part is that, while they take the time to point out "this is real and it's going to affect YOU," they fail to add the all important, "and this is what YOU can do about it." So here's a few thoughts.


Think about it, talk about it...act on it. It's a big scary problem, but ignoring it will not only NOT make it go away, it's only going to give it the chance to get even bigger and scarier.

OK, end of soapbox speechifying.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-26 11:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] phanatic.livejournal.com
* - Get behind nuclear power. Seriously, really behind nuclear power. Wind and solar are nice and have their place, especially locally, but nuclear's the only thing that will work as a global replacement for fossil fuels. We know how do to it, there are reactor designs that are inherently safe, and the waste issues pale to insignificance besides those of fossil fuels.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-27 03:20 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] taerowyn.livejournal.com
While I don't think nuclear should be taken off the table completely, I also don't see it as the be all and end all answer. There are still some major issues (global warming itself actually being one of them (http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/20/africa/nuke.php)) that prevent it from being the silver bullet.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-27 12:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] phanatic.livejournal.com
If the complications prove serious in countries where inland sources of water are growing scarce, where seafront nuclear stations are unwelcome or impractical and where alternative cooling technologies are too expensive,

Unwelcome or impractical.

Read, "Ted Kennedy doesn't want to see cooling towers off of the Vineyard."

Huge amounts of water are needed to cool power plants.

Huge amounts of water are needed to cool power plants that are based on 50-year-old designs. Advanced designs like molten-salt reactors and integral-fast reactors can be closed-cycle, and don't need a river flower by to cool the plant. I agree that PWRs and LWRs are not the way to go, but unless you want a mass die-off of billions, nuclear's a necessity.

Profile

taerowyn: (Default)
taerowyn

July 2011

S M T W T F S
     12
34567 89
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags