2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

If carbon dioxide is causing global warming, then I say good.  The planet is too cold anyway.  If the northern latitudes could support the growth of more crops and timber, then the planet could more easily feed and house the people.  I see no serious danger in slightly elevated CO2 in the atmosphere.  The beneficial effect is that it makes crops and trees grow more rapidly.  Look over the globe and you will see that there are vast areas in Russia that could grow crops if the climate was a little warmer.

As for carbon sequestration, I think this is a dangerous thing to do.  Carbon dioxide is heavier than air and would stay close to the ground if a serious leak occurred.  In very strong concentrations CO2 is toxic and will kill animal and human life.  I remember watching a program on TV about volcanos and  there was a large emission of CO2 from a volcanic eruption in Africa where it killed every animal and human in a large area.  Accidents happen no matter how much planning and engineering goes into a project.  Concentraing and sequestering CO2 in large reservoirs is highly dangerous to human life and represents a greater hazard than the status quo.

Mankind already has a very large carbon sequestering program that  has been going on for a long time.  It is relatively safe and is called the sustainable timber industry.  How many tons of carbon have been sequstered in the timber that has been harvested and utilized in the last 100 years?  Has anyone calculated that?

I think it is good that the current programs of wind energy and wave energy utilization are moving ahead.  These programs seem to have little impact on the environment.

Electric cars will also reduce the production of CO2 from carbon rich gasoline.  The batteries to make them practical have been invented and industry is tooling up for large scale production.  I believe that most of us in USA, will be driving electric cars in 20 years. 

There are also a number of flood control dams in this country that could utilize hydro power but currently do not.  I say why not?  Maybe they could not produce power in the summer months but in the winter there is a strong demand for electricity and it could be utilized.

posted 3 years, 7 months ago
view in context