Economy's that rely on fossil fuels...?

Question

have no long term future, d o you agree?
fossil fuels are going too run out sooner or later, so we might as well make the transition to sustainable energy sources now. i am not convinced by the global warming theory but have seen no evidence to discount it. i believe that because there might be a chance of disaster we have no choice but to act responcibly to protect our planet. we will have to change to sustainable energy sooner or later and if we are ensuring our planets future at the same time the better.

Answer 1

What is long term? We have about a thousand years at the current rate - even longer as new technologies improve efficiencies, and as long as other countries are also moving to sustainable, renewable energy sources. If there are any "economies" that can remain intact for a thousand years, then that would be out of the norm. Look at the different economies of the relatively young United States: agricultural to industrial to technological to information and services.

Our economy is becoming less dependent on fuel consumption with our ability to do business via fax, telephone, and definitely the internet. We are able to create businesses without a brick and mortar office or storefront.

I do agree that it only makes sense, though, to wean ourselves off of fossil-fuels. We should do it in a way that guarantees success. It's kind of like smoking or dieting: some people decide to go cold turkey or go on crash diets. They usually fail, and are less likely to ever make the decision to quit in the future. A judicious plan to decrease our dependence with reasonable sacrifices that prevents economic harm would be the best route in my opinion. Patience is the key. We didn't get to this place overnight, and it will take a long time to get us out of here.

Answer 2

What is your definition of long term?
Is a Hundred years long term or short term?
What kind of sustainable energy are you talking about?
If farmers start to plant saw grass for sustainable fuels instead of food stuffs will you complain and picket them for being greedy? Because they can provide better for their families by planting a crop that's easier to grow and brings more profit.
Have you seen any evidence to prove global warming?
I'm not talking that it's warmer today than the day you were born. The longest continuous weather recording station shows no proof of this. go to noaa web site and look it up.
If the earth has never been this warm how come the Chinese have maps that are over a 1000 years old showing a water passage thru the Arctic circle something explorers did again in1907. Did anyone do this in 2006 or yet this year? I didn't think so. Yes glaciers are receding in Greenland. But did the people that told you this also tell you that they are thickening at their source? I didn't think so. Have any of the fear mounggers ever accurately predicted global weather two months in advance? I didn't think so, why would I beleive they can be anymore accurate in a hundred years? We most likely will not be around to see if they are right . Possibly not even someone whos a mature 13 year old today won't live to see these predictions come true. If a prediction can't be plausably varified it works for the Fear moungers. There will aways be people that won't take the time to look at any argument and see if it actually makes sense. If it makes a good sound bite or headline it must be right, Even though they have a hard time accurately reporting a bus crash that they are looking at the same live pictures you are. Anyone that was willing to honestly look at both sides of this can and will find information to call the theory into Question.

Danni

Answer 3

I agree with you ... to a certain extent. My country's economy is based on fossil fuels. The rate at which they are being removed cannot measure up to the amount of time they take to be formed. It's not an infinite resource and countries need to invest in resources that are renewable and sustainable for the long term ... because there will come a time when we end up in some serious trouble ....

I am however convinced by the global warming theories ... the data speaks for itself. But, we do need to be responsible and protect our planet. Should the worse come to pass ... we would have nowhere else to go ...

Answer 4

Have you watched the Discovery channel lately? There are all kinds of proof that there IS GLOBAL WARMING. Last year, on Christmas day (Dec. 25th) we had a temp of about 60 degrees. Does this sound normal? I dont think so, but think what you want. I am not one to be critical, but this is a serious situation. Our weather has been wacked for about 10 yrs now. All of a sudden, people are taking notice now. Sustainable energy is important regardless. If you cannot afford to buy a new vehichle, try to keep your tires at the right air pressure and go a bit slower. It will help on gas mileage. I am not rich and surely dont have the money to buy a new car, but there are other ways to contribute to our beautiful world. Recycling is a major DO!! I takes only 5% of the energy to produce aluminum cans from recycled material..whereas it takes a whole lot more to get these materials from our natural environment. I am not one to be critical of anything, but this is a serious problem. There are tons of things that can be done to help our planet and save on emmissions. Try www.breathingearth.net, www.conservation.org, www.earth911.org, www.freecycle.org, www.greenlivingonline.com, www.lowimpactliving.com, and www.greenpeople.com. Hope this helps some.

Answer 5

Fossil fuels will always be needed for certain limited functions. Airplanes use refined oil (jet fuel). I cannot see them operating on solar, hydro, or wind. Motor vehicles can shift to electric as the energy density for batteries increases. Homes can divide power sources among solar panels, electricity, and fossil fuel for light, heating and cooking.

That leaves the question of building and powering central power plants. (those electric vehicles need to replenish somewhere.) Hydroelectric power is great. However, did you realize that some 250 hydro plants were destroyed in the last 5 years so that fish can go up the main river and not have to use the spillways? Hydro can, if fully utilized, supply about 15 percent of out country's present electric needs. Moving on to wind power. We could get about 5 percent of our needs from this source but too many politicians oppose the units in their districts. Ted Kennedy has kept them away from off shore Massachusetts for decades. He apparently does not want them visible when he goes out on his yacht. That leaves one of the safest sources of renewable energy: nuclear power. As soon as you mention it, the uneducated politicians and self styled "environmentalists" go crazy. Nuclear energy could supply 100 percent of the nation's electrical needs without interruption. In the 1980's, there was a cold spell so severe that frozen rivers and frozen coal piles caused many coal burning plants in the northeast to shut down and nuclear's portion of national electric output rose to one third. And, speaking of coal, a coal plant releases between 10 and 40 times as much radiation into the environment as a nuclear plant of the same output. The annual non-fuel waste from a nuclear plant can fit into a room that is 10 feet by 10 feet by 10 feet. Nuclear plants also generate new fuel as they operate. Thorium, placed in a blanket around the core is converted to uranium of the fissile (burnable) type. Non-fissile (not burnable) uranium in the core converts into burnable plutonium, also suitable as a reactor fuel. If the "spent" fuel is recycled and all the newly generated fuel (along with the portion that had not burned when the fuel was removed) was recovered and made into fresh fuel, the fuel waste volume from a reactor would be no larger than the non-fuel waste. I forgot to mention: nuclear power does not release more than trace amounts of greenhouse gasses. The worst nuclear power plant accident in this country was at Three Mile Island in 1979. Nobody was hurt, either on site or off site.

Answer 6

I don't totally aggree. Me and my dad, I'm thriteen with the mind of a thirty year old apparently, were talking about that when I brung up the economy and how much people are screwing over Mother Nature.
And the people who are screwing around with Mother Nature will pay, and we'll be the fine ones.
Like how apparently during the appocolyps all Christians/Catholics blah blah will be saved becuase of God. So on and so forth.

Answer 7

I completely agree. I am not in a position to buy a new car now but have started driving slower on highways to conserve fuel.

Answer 8

Or, use fossil fuels for the next 200 years while we perfect fusion power.

Answer 9

Why do you activists care? I in spite of the shown fact that don't get it. advantageous I understand the excellent element of stuff no longer going extinct, yet even then... Why do you care if it is going extinct or no longer? What impact does it have on your existence? i'm curious. My significant question is why do you question the humanity element of it? they're animals. If somebody a million/2 way international kills some element and flow away it to bleed out in discomfort, how does it effect you? Killing and suffering happens on a daily basis, and there isn't from now on some element you're able to do approximately it. extremely, i'm taking trip of my day to form this and argue, with the excellent understand-how which you're arranged to no longer even evaluate it. that's with the aid of utilising the shown fact that's extremely no longer elementary to regulate human beings's innovations. have you ever listened to a Jehova's Witness? have you ever seen yet yet another opinion as properly your person. you won't replace each and each individual's innovations, you're able to make 1000 regulations, and persons will in spite of the shown fact that proceed to do unfavorable themes. i think of which you do understand. That it does no longer effect you. i think of that that's human sympathy. you experience undesirable for the animals that are death. And to be honest, i think of that that's egocentric and privileged. you prefer to regulate some element that does no longer effect you in any appreciate. humorous how that works does no longer it? i think of the same theory is with gay marriage. people who're adversarial to it, view it as non-honest or gross, besides the shown fact that it does no longer effect them. good i'm executed. i understand that hardcore animal activists will probably shrug this off. that's a competent lesson to earnings. Your in basic terms a small, insignificant piece of meat in a international with 7 billion different human beings. the area in basic terms 0.0001% probably cares what you're saying. quicker you already understand that the faster you're able to stay a lots much less annoying existence.

Answer 10

wait and see