Do we need to go to Mars or the Moon if the greenhouse effect will worsen. Or do we need to live underground and on the water! Even underwater if need be.
I was watching PBS the other day and they were saying how the greenhouse effect isnt as bad as initially thought or as bad as it could be. The reason was that in the past century, the US and Europe have produced alot of particulate pollution in addition to the greenhouse gasses. Particulates are small particles os soot, etc. that when in the atmosphere act togehter to refect sunlight and heat back to space. Hence it has saved us from the brunt of the greenhouse effect. The tide could be turning though, they said, as todays cars and plants produce almost no particulate matter but still produce some greenhouse gasses. So we dont get the benefit of the particulates as much now as we used to. But countries like China and India still produce much of their energy by less-clean methods that produce the amount of particulates that the US used to, so its a toss up.
Anyway, the only way to solve the greenhouse effect is to produce less of those greenhouse gasses. Solar, wind, and nuclear energy are the biggest energy sources we have that are 0 greenhouse gasses. Even electric or hydrogen cars produce the greenhouse gasses–not at the tailpipe but at the plant where they produce the electricity or portable hydrogen. There are far to many other atmospheric problems to deal with on Mars, the moon, underground, or underwater that make the Earth still the best place out there. In the future, those places and the modifications needed could become econmically feasible, but for as far forward as we can see now, they are not.
Leave a Comment
If you would like to make a comment, please fill out the form below.
gteenhouse gases/global warming would all be in check if the libs would shut their whiney mouths
I was watching PBS the other day and they were saying how the greenhouse effect isnt as bad as initially thought or as bad as it could be. The reason was that in the past century, the US and Europe have produced alot of particulate pollution in addition to the greenhouse gasses. Particulates are small particles os soot, etc. that when in the atmosphere act togehter to refect sunlight and heat back to space. Hence it has saved us from the brunt of the greenhouse effect. The tide could be turning though, they said, as todays cars and plants produce almost no particulate matter but still produce some greenhouse gasses. So we dont get the benefit of the particulates as much now as we used to. But countries like China and India still produce much of their energy by less-clean methods that produce the amount of particulates that the US used to, so its a toss up.
Anyway, the only way to solve the greenhouse effect is to produce less of those greenhouse gasses. Solar, wind, and nuclear energy are the biggest energy sources we have that are 0 greenhouse gasses. Even electric or hydrogen cars produce the greenhouse gasses–not at the tailpipe but at the plant where they produce the electricity or portable hydrogen. There are far to many other atmospheric problems to deal with on Mars, the moon, underground, or underwater that make the Earth still the best place out there. In the future, those places and the modifications needed could become econmically feasible, but for as far forward as we can see now, they are not.