Environment - March 2007

(science project)

2007-03-08 07:50:53 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

It is expensive to produce Hydrogen (H2) from... fossil fuels. Other possible primary sources of energy would be even more expensive.

So how is it done ? Hydrocarbs are split into their basic elements: Carbon (C) and Hydrogen (H2)

So here´s the deal:
Try to pretend you´re not going to use the carbon why we´re mining coal in large quantities ??? Isn´t that an illusion ?
why not directly burn regular fuel then ? Doesn´t it seem more logical ?

Especially, the cheapest option for hydrogen is to produce it from natural gas. But we can already power cars with natural gas LNG (Liquified Natural Gas) using actual technologies and it´s very clean... so ?

Hydrogen is a carrier energy carrier like electricity and a not a source of energy (sun, wind, coal, etc...). It can´t naturally be found in large quantities in the environment. A carrier can only be produced with a source.

What´s your opinion ?

2007-03-08 07:22:50 · 9 answers · asked by NLBNLB 6

We all know that climate change is a natural phenomenon which has always happened throughout millions of years. We know the earth went into and came out of at least a dozen ice ages.

As of a week ago I had never heard of "carbon offsets". Now, thanks to Al Gore and his faithful followers of the First Church of Global Warming, here is what I have learned:

1. Carbon offsets are like sacraments. You have to pay for absolution to green companies that plant trees or produce solar energy in order to fly private jets and power your 20-room mansion with 8 bathrooms.

2. The faithful followers are surly and do not have a sense of humor when it comes to their leader's hypocrisy being exposed.

3. Al Gore buys carbon offsets from himself through Generation Investment Management, a company he co-founded and serves as chairman. The company invests in green companies designed to turn a profit which in turn profits Gore. Very nice gig.

2007-03-08 06:07:37 · 4 answers · asked by toma2975 1

what is a greenhouse effect?

2007-03-08 05:54:06 · 3 answers · asked by pandpgirl 2

2007-03-08 05:45:28 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Can you believe this???

2007-03-08 05:39:52 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-08 05:30:07 · 10 answers · asked by Vim v 1

2007-03-08 05:26:23 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

what about the vaastu

2007-03-08 05:26:02 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

I have never met a person with a degree in Chemistry, or climatology etc. that does not agree that humans are having an impact on Global temperatures..

If these people had even a rudimentary understanding of the physical properties of Greenhouse gases they would agree that reducing their emissions is a good idea..

I think that the opponents of Global Warming simply do not WANT it to be true.. So they deny deny deny..

I am an Environmental Conservation major from a state university and I do not know for sure the extent that humans are raising the temperature of the Earth.. I simply have common sense and a love for the Earth.. I think on this issue it is better to err on the side of caution

2007-03-08 05:24:09 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

Will the average Bushie accept global warming as real and man-caused?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070308/us_nm/climate_hunters_dc

2007-03-08 04:59:42 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

The global warming zealots cry out that scientists are telling us that global warming is caused by man's activities and we must change our ways.
However the same people will tell us all that the scientists are talking out of their bottoms when they tell us that things such as mobile phones are harmless.

2007-03-08 03:58:20 · 11 answers · asked by Barrie G 3

2007-03-08 03:56:48 · 6 answers · asked by ekountoupis 1

2007-03-08 03:53:07 · 1 answers · asked by aristondog 1

Al Gore initiative

2007-03-08 03:15:18 · 2 answers · asked by Shannon L 1

Eat a liberal.

Does anyone else agree that that is our first best hope?

2007-03-08 03:05:32 · 4 answers · asked by kent j 3

When our federal government and major motor companies (GM) got rid of the EV1, and other electric vehicles, it was because these vehicles did not use oil, but were extremely safe, low maintenance, and required absolutely NO gas. We have the technology to reestablish and market this vehicle, why not?

2007-03-08 02:57:03 · 9 answers · asked by andiepandiecottoncandie 1

2007-03-08 02:44:31 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

of Americans so does this make him a Hippocrit?

2007-03-08 02:42:11 · 11 answers · asked by Willie 4

Then, will I be able to claim back all this "Green Tax" that I must, surely be paying under false pretences?

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/08032007/344/global-warming-swindle-exposed.html

2007-03-08 02:42:01 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-08 01:51:14 · 14 answers · asked by supritha p 1

2007-03-08 01:28:01 · 4 answers · asked by madhu 1

2007-03-08 01:03:17 · 17 answers · asked by SOJLO 3

Why is work moraly good when it is ulimatley based on exploitation of animal humans or earths resouces. Some people cliam it is morally good to work but can these people be seen to being morally bad when it is ulimatley work is based on exploitation ie of animal humans or earths resouces. This is even more relevant now that human work is causing major ecological crises on the earth

2007-03-08 00:27:40 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-07 23:46:41 · 1 answers · asked by Jeanky 2

2007-03-07 23:22:45 · 4 answers · asked by FredSchwartz 2

It is for people with learn diffcutes who live there

2007-03-07 22:30:49 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-07 22:25:43 · 11 answers · asked by iNader 1

2007-03-07 22:13:29 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous

I want to write a letter to other animals explaining the scanario. Advise what to write and how to warn them of the impending danger

2007-03-07 21:27:09 · 8 answers · asked by Waseema S 1