A lot of critics are attacking Al Gore for his environmental policies and are accusing him for creating green agendas in order to make personal gains. Well, why should he NOT earn anything out of his efforts? After all, he's been pressuring people to be more environmentally aware for "more than 30 years" and says that he is "in a position to put at least some of my money where [his] mouth is." I personally don't disagree. I mean, the state we're in right now is pretty detrimental. Pollution is increasing and natural habitats dying off. Populations are on the rise in many parts of the world. There is a huge crisis that cannot be ignored in my opinion.
I don't understand why there are so many skeptics about environmental issues. It's one thing to be skeptical about the moon landing, but it's another to be skeptical about the environment. I mean, should we just sit back and watch the whole world fall apart, or should we actually do something about it?
War for Ukraine Day 787: The Butcher’s Bill from Dnipro
35 minutes ago
10 comments:
I agree. I've never understood people who deny global warming or other serious environmental issues. Even if global warming doesn't exist (which it clearly does) why would it be a bad thing to use solar energy or use other alternative energy sources. Whats the downside of helping the environment??
People don't want to feel the need to change. They don't want to admit they have been doing anything wrong. When it is the world, and especially their country, polluting the environment, they feel that it is a personal attack on them, so they won't admit that they could be doing something so bad.
At least, that is the reasoning that makes the most sense to me. Not that, of course, it truly makes any sense, but it fits any profiling I've seen of the human mind.
-Ilan Seid-Green
It's not even that, Ilan. Georgia, I dunno about you, but I don't have $20,000 sitting in my house doing nothing so I can pay for solar panels. It takes about 10 years (I think) to just cover the costs of buying solar panels and about 3-4 years to make up the energy that was used to make the solar panel. The downside? Tons of costs.. It's not cheap to overthrow our entire energy grid for something more eco-friendly. There is always more to it. Other alternative energy source: Wind, Nuclear power, wave, hydrogen..etc... It's not cheap. I don't know of many people in a position financially to place hundreds of windmills on hills, in the ocean, or anywhere else. Nuclear power, no matter how efficient and feasible, people are still worried over Chenoble and Three Mile Island, even though there have been papers saying nuclear power isn't dangerous unless mishandled, and with today's security procedures, things will be fine. (I'll go into arguments if people actually care, there's too many to type out here). Ocean waves, we still don't have the technology to be able to invest into this soundly and expect good results, still in development. Same with hydrogen and stuff.
Do we have people doing stuff about it? Yes, they're what we call engineers. Do we have people willing to invest the billions needed to sustain the research so we can have a hope somewhere down the line for a efficient and cost effective energy source? I don't think so, not yet. Too many people are still focused on the economy to worry too much about the environment.
Well Franklin.. we can start out small. Try replacing all your lightbulbs around with those energy saving ones (the twisty ones). That will help both you (costs of electricity) & others.
Lily, the small things people are already doing, sure, it's still not a huge portion of the population, but it is getting somewhere. However, it's not enough. The small things that everyone will reduce energy consumption by x% (I'll look up numbers later, if need be). That x is relatively small, we still need a long term solution, and currently, those long term solutions are extremely expensive that come with minimal incentive to invest in.
I agree with Georgia and Kasper in that nobody can seriously deny global warming and other environmental issues. They are happening! However, I also agree with Franklin in that money is a big problem when it comes to fighting these problems. On the other hand, if everyone who could afford to do so would become more environmentally consious, I'm sure that would make a difference.
Franklin, although solar panels certainly aren't the only thing you can do to help save energy/the environment, the cost is a good point, especially in America. But one of the reasons for that is the denial by Americans - other countries have free connection of solar panels to the power grid, in America you have to pay for it, and it costs a lot. but the people don't want to put taxpayer money to work for purposes such as these.
-Ilan Seid-Green
Well, solar panels are essentially the only consumer available item to GENERATE electricity, as far as I know. But yeah, there are a ton of other ways.. But it's not even taxpayer money, we have electric cars (and rather powerful ones, at that).. We as consumers have a lot more control over energy consumption than we think.. it's just not enough people are aware to make an impact.
One thing I'd like to bring up though is how far research has come in terms of creating renewable energy. Nuclear fusion..
http://www.newsweek.com/id/222792
Depending on how this test goes, we may have solved most of our energy needs... GO SCIENCE!
Sounds cool, that energy creator in that article. Although I can't help but be afraid of how the military could use something like that.
-Ilan Seid-Green
I guess, but then again, can we say that about all technological advances?
Post a Comment