Climate Change and Renewable Energy News and Discussion
- Thread starter FairAndUnbiased
- Start date
Does this thread cover the connected issues of Overfishing + Ocean Cleanup + Deforestation?
CO2 reduction by itself won't fix the problem, because the actual regenerative ability of the ecosystem is being actively destroyed. You can have 100% renewable energy but if Ocean Life and Forests are killed off, the ecosystem will still be destroyed. We're in the midst of a 'Network Collapse', which if left unchecked, inevitably leads to a Mass Extinction event, and once that event starts, it is irreversible.
CO2 reduction by itself won't fix the problem, because the actual regenerative ability of the ecosystem is being actively destroyed. You can have 100% renewable energy but if Ocean Life and Forests are killed off, the ecosystem will still be destroyed. We're in the midst of a 'Network Collapse', which if left unchecked, inevitably leads to a Mass Extinction event, and once that event starts, it is irreversible.
Last edited:
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Here's the problem with hydrogen. Like I've said before if you can't just fill your tank with water and go, it's not going to catch on in the US anytime soon and all these other countries betting on hydrogen are going to fail without the US going hydrogen because that's a major infrastructure change in the US. Anything infrastructure needs federal money and just look at anything else infrastructure with the US it's a hard hill to climb. Besides add that hydrogen now cost more than gas or electrical which is another big turn-off when there's a gas station everywhere and everyone has an electrical plug at their house. There's always China but I'll bet these smaller countries going hydrogen is because China has cornered the market on electrical so they ain't going to be big players. The US is easier to manipulate than China even with the long haul uphill climb.
A 2014 published in the journal PLOS Biology showed that a high-seas fishing closure would dramatically increase fish populations in protected areas and, through what scientists often term a "spillover" effect, ultimately allow fishers in coastal waters to catch more. The authors of that paper, Christopher Costello, a scientist at the University of California at Santa Barbara, and , an assistant professor of marine sciences at the California Polytechnic State University, in San Luis Obispo, concluded that a high-seas fishing ban would increase the total biomass of some species by 150 percent, would boost catches in coastal waters by 30 percent and double fishers' profit margins.
hmm.. catch me up on this ammonia thing? Don't we make most of our ammonia from steam reforming of natural gas/ syngas from coal gasification? Even if the green hydrogen is a thing, the volume production would be way too small to substitute the gas/coal routes, especially considering that we are still going to be using ammonia to make urea etc... How would this work? Don't get twiggy sometimes.
Ammonia is NH4. So you need nitrogen, which you can scoop from the air, and hydrogen. The hydrogen is typically extracted from methane (CH4). That is so called "blue hydrogen". "Green hydrogen" is extracted from electrolysis of water (H2O). But electrolysis itself basically wastes half the energy used in the process.