CLIMATE HYSTERIA GOES UP A NOTCH (OR TWO)

@Longleggedlady Nice delusion you operate under. What do you think is clean energy? (I could use a good laugh).

@hippyjoe1955 not a delusion
Hydrogen is feasible, solar, wind to name three.
The coal, gas, oil fired all have to go

@Longleggedlady You do know that it takes more energy to produce hydrogen than you get from using it unless you are talking about nuclear fusion don't you? Solar and wind have to be two of the dirtiest and least efficient types of energy production available. The amount of environmental degradation caused by such vanity projects is unmeasurable. From removing land from life producing foods to actually killing of wildlife to the destruction caused by mining for the materials needed to produce them to the very short life span of this technology and the inability to recycle the spent products. Please try harder. Your pipe dream is destroying the planet.

@hippyjoe1955 With Solar I am not talking about building Solar farms I am proposing that existing roof space is utilized there are millions and millions of acres there that can be utilized and that each home generates it's own power supply, the initial installation done with a sort of government subsidy.
Hydrogen can be done cleanly as well, I am not a terrible fan of the wind turbine they are in my mind ugly and they make a horrible sound. There is also the possibility of lots of small hydro stations along rivers with the right design of driving it there is no harm to wild life at all.
The bottom line though is COAL, GAS and OIL fired have got to go and the sooner the better.
As for the farm thing 25% of each needs to go back into the ECOSYSTEM and be replanted with indigenous flora and the fauna reintroduce.
Next all forms of plastic but especially single use must go including all those things used for take away foods, carrier bags etc

@Longleggedlady So the average solar panel barring nasty weather has a useful life of about 10 years after which it must be disposed of. Any solution for that? It can't be recycled and the energy that goes into making one exceeds the energy produced by one so again back to you. Oh BTW the same applies to windmills. They have a very limited lifespan and can not be recycled. The other problem that you fail to address it the unreliability of said items. In January which is a high energy draw month where I live the sun get up around 9 AM and sets around 4:30 pm. It is also very low on the horizon which means the panels are least effective when they are most needed. It would appear as though you read the sales literature not the scientific data sheets.

@hippyjoe1955 I have a large home in the south of England that is completely powered by renewables all year actually the entire estate is powered by renewables we have pretty ghastly weather most of the year but we have never run out, my husband did the design part and is way better qualified than I at the science part but then he was Electrical engineer.
There has got to be a CLEANING UP of how we do things everything has got to go to being at least 95% sustainability and we have got to start not only looking after the environment we have got start enhancing it and now
If we don't start solving it we might as well just ask PUTIN and BIDEN to play with there respective buttons now and go out with one big bang.

@Longleggedlady My point is that solar and wind is not environmentally friendly. I went to visit a friend the other day that lives completely off the grid. He has a windmill and a solar array and a diesel generator. It seems that when things get cold and the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing he still wants to heat his house.

@Longleggedlady One question for you. What is wrong with coal and gas and oil? You claim they have to go but give no actual reason. Funny thing a bit north of here getting the oil our to ground is a local environmental boon. The oil is in the soil and it seeps into the local rivers and pollutes the lakes downstream. It is natural. It has been there since the world was formed. The vegetation is stunted as a result. Humans have figured out how to extract and profitably use the oil and then reclaim the land so the trees grow much bigger and the wildlife thrives. At one plant where they are extracting the oil the local deer population stays close to the humans because the wolves will eat them if they wander too far into the forest.

@hippyjoe1955 They are all three very dirty as in the pollution they cause when burnt as a whole they are not renewable either there is not and endless supply of fossil fuels it might not be in mine or your life time but they will run out.
We cannot carry on pumping dirt into the air regardless of whether it comes from making energy or anything else I equally am not in favor of lithium it is very very bad stuff there is a better version it is just currently exclusively owned for a specific project. But perhaps it will become available at a cost to generate part of the special economic zones GDP along with some of the other tech etc that is exclusively owned.

@Longleggedlady What pollution comes from burning natural gas? Methane? CO2 and Water. Water is not a pollutant and neither is CO2. CO2 is plant food and the basis for life here on earth. No CO2 = NO LIFE. Nor is 400 PPM dangerous. A truly healthy biome would have 3 times that amount. Let's do a comparison. A family wants to live in Canada. They know the temperature can go from +40 to -40. They know the hot days are long and the cold nights are just as long. They want to live in a warm house so they obviously have to heat it in the winter. Yes they can insulate it and make it very weather proof but you still need to heat it in the winter. Should they use wood? Most of Canada is covered with softwood trees that don't have a high heat content in the wood and it smokes a lot and you need a lot of it to heat even a small house. Trees don't grow all that quickly and if you cut them down to burn them you will soon deplete your resource. Maybe burn coal? Well coal around here has a lot of sulfur in it so it is a bit hard on the environment and mining it has long term environmental impacts. Long term is not permanent and the old mines can be restored. Of course that takes a lot of energy as well. They could heat the house with natural gas which is clean burning and safe and has high heat content. It's production and transportation have very very small impact and its combustion byproducts are naturally recycled. So which one is the best alternative? If you go for the fourth option - electricity I will laugh at you. It is produced by burning gas or coal or oil even if the direct feed in is from solar panels since solar panels take a lot of energy to produce. Oh and wind..... Well there is that small matter of all the rare earths used to make the generators and all the gas used to melt the steel and produce the fiberglass. So again what is the best option?

@Longleggedlady Where are we to plant food crops, and what are the ex-farmers going to do for a living, when we've abandoned the countryside not covered with solar arrays, to run to scrub and eventual woods, filled with re-introduced animals the local ecosytem had adapted to living without?

What are we to do when we run out or stop using crude-oil, natural-gas and coal, and metals become rarer and costlier ? (Though at least metals are recoverable.)

Very easy headlines, slogans and cliches; but very difficult problems with very difficult solutions.

@ArishMell I wasn't proposing building solar farms I was advocating using existing roof space on houses and space on buildings and making them standalone entities and where they can actually put some back into the grid for storage. So when it is needed it is there.
We will run out of fossil fuels or countries will move away from producing/extracting them for others to use. The world has got to move to renewable energy sources and it can be done, we have also got to move to achieving 95% sustainability with everything we do in manufacturing things, and we have got to start not only protecting the environment but actually start enhancing it.
Farming has got to change the way it is done we need to get it back to organic, and remove the pesticides, herbicides and all the other chemical stuff we shove into the earth, it is not good for the environment and lots of it is going into the food we eat be it vegetables, or animal.
There is one very simple example if we lost the bee's and the ants, the humans are next to be extinct.

@Longleggedlady I largely agree - and in the long run I don't think all these solar farms and off-shore wind-turbines will be sustainable. Without crude-oil derivatives the latter especially, and their associated cables, transformers and so one could not be built and maintained in anything like their present form.

A lot of farmers are moving to something I think they call "Regenerative", which really means what their forefathers had been doing for generations - rotations of crops, fallow and animals - but given a trendy name.

@Longleggedlady Serious question for you. What is renewable energy? How do we attain it? While all the trendies think of solar or wind or biomass all of these have massive impacts and most of them take more energy to produce than the energy they provide. Solar panels are a prime example. They last 10 years and then need to be replaced. The amount of material in them that is a huge consumer of energy to refine or otherwise produce makes them worse than relying on coal. Then there is the disposal problem. What do you do with all the solar panels that no longer provide enough energy? What do we do with them? Again the energy needed to recycle the bits that can be recycled is greater than the energy produced in the life time of the panels.