English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Is it realistic to believe that energy conservation can solve eminent electricity shortages, gasoline shortages, and water shortages?

2006-10-07 10:41:43 · 6 answers · asked by EmAnnEm 1 in Social Science Economics

6 answers

Ok, just imagine this. There is a group of suppoadly really smart guys who meet someplace in the world. They own the world. They set the priority for all things. They decided to mess with the energy to see if they can make things change or for them to make more money that they don't even know what to do with. It works and all get scared and things start changing. California has to buy electricity from others. Then they get tired of electricty and they all get together and decide to mess with oil. Ok lets start a war in a counrty we don't even know what the land lay out is. Oh but wait George bush is freinds with osoma binden. Opps have i confuse anyone yet. Ok well they all get together and get the war wagnon a rolling. This cause the oil prices to go sky high. Now they have to find a reason to start the war. Ever wondered why we can find osoma? he's been right there in front of us more times than i can count. Ok so we kill a buch of folks and loss less. Then we have the bore board that says ok lets take over something else and they move over to Sadam Hussain. He should have been gotten. It didn't take them but a 1/3 the time to get him and he has all the money to hide out and all the fear factors to hide and we got sons to. Where oh where is osoma. Ok then they decide ok lets mess with Iran to see if they still have thier nuclear weapons, and to make North Korea panic an get thier stuff up and ready and testing so we can see where they are. In the mean time no one gives a crap about the homeless, the hungry and the ones that have no medical insurance here. We don't make them money. all of the above things make them money. now they want to stop the immigrents from crossing our borders. Ok, so who is going to do all that low low paying stuff. These guys work long hours for almost no pay below minimum wage. Do you want thier jobs, I don't. Who will clean the riches houses, the folks on welfare.. Nope because our system pays us to stay off work and we get food stamps, medical insurance, hospital care for more babies and we don't have to work. Not that we don't want to work it is the system. If the system would work with the workers and suppliment the workers pay and give medical to all, opps that will cost them, not a money making system. to simple to solve. They wnat difficult things to solve or ponder over. Now the water is the one and only not man made shortage. persay. The climate changes have created the shortages. The big shots out in hollywood, how often do you thing they empty thier pools and water thier lawns. Man can solve many of his problems if he would just shut off the TV's, use as little as electricity as possible, take all those electrical and computers and music devices away from our kids, get them out to learn to fish and grow thier own food and build thier own houses and make foods and clothing. We are a spoiled nation who has been blinded by our own ignorance and trust in the government, they don't care about us they care about money and how to make it, how to make others produce what we need for a price well under what they give it to us for and we go with out medical help and there for when we do get sick, more are sicker and more die more often there for iliminating less money they have to put out. Well I know I haven't answered your question but I did get somethings off my chest.

2006-10-07 11:17:53 · answer #1 · answered by dgbrsand1 3 · 0 0

Just last night I watched 2 shows (back-to-back) on the Science Channel. One dealt w/global warming and the other was called "What if the oil ran out"? They were VERY disturbing! Strangely, the did NOT focus so much on longer life spans or population as HOW MUCH the average family uses (in terms of energy), thus spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The US has only 1/4 of the worlds population yet consumes FAR more than any other country per capita!

In one segment, they asked, "what can the individual do?". Just be replecing ONE light bulb with a long-burning fluorescent, you could save as much as not driving your car for a year...or something like that!!!

So, there are things (like unplugging appliances when not in use, even video games...I was stunned!), the average American can do to DRASTICALLY reduce CO2 output. Also, hybrid cars and public transportation are enormously helpful.

THe problem is that countries like China and India want to catch up to OUR current consumption of electricity, etc., and if they don't find alternative energy, THEY will be the next big culprits, not the U.S.!

So...it's not just extended lifespan, but what those alive NOW will do with it, that counts! Not producing too many children would sure help, IMO! I vote for tax breaks for anybody who "Goes GREEN" AND gets sterilized!!! We really DO NOT need more people on this planet right now!

2006-10-07 11:14:29 · answer #2 · answered by Gwynneth Of Olwen 6 · 0 0

From a purely scientific perspective humans are equal to a virus, we invade the host (the environment) consume it to the point of exhaustion and move on. Our lifestyles not being in harmony with our environment causes the use of the resources to become overrun and depleted. Lifestyles that include two or three cars, tvs, playstation type machines. Not one for the children to share but two or three for each little brat in the house. Ever since we invented credit, consumerism was the only next step. With consumerism being the mantra of this industrialized society the end result is a runaway train of sucking up everything we can produce and simply throwing it away when done. Simple equation really. Because it takes energy to produce and run all the little toys, trinkets and trappings.

2006-10-07 11:18:30 · answer #3 · answered by metalsoft@sbcglobal.net 2 · 0 0

Two questions:
a) Longer life spans = more social energy/dollars in care. National debt soars as people live toward 100. Practical: landfills overflow w/ senior diapers as incontenance increases.
b) Energy conservation could deal with the issues if 1) someone had the political will to do so 2) There was greater popular awareness of the seriousness and 3) people could be convinced to move from a "me first" attitude.

2006-10-07 10:48:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Eminent electricity, gasoline and water shortages ? When are they going to happen ? I need to know to prepare. When you become older, you do not need as much so I would expect that the amounts of energy needed would not be significantly increased. You have a doom and gloom science teacher. Sounds like he expects total chaos and anarchy. He has to calm down and not have his students worry so needlessly. But it sounds like you have to understand the question that was asked. Looks like you are only going through the motions in science class. Too bad, that is such a waste.

2016-03-28 01:07:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No, but it is realistic to conserve and seek alternatives for energy.
Nothing on earth is infinite.

2006-10-10 13:51:05 · answer #6 · answered by big dawg 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers