Re: CO2 driven global warming
Dan Clemmensen (Dan@Clemmensen.ShireNet.com)
Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:15:27 -0400
Eric Watt Forste wrote:
>
> Dan Clemmensen writes:
> > No, C02-driven global warming is not a conspiracy,
> > The evidence is subject to interpretation, but the
> > free-enterprise peiple are rather more guilty of
> > selective interpretation than on this one than are
> > the "eco-genocide conspritors." Of course, nuclear
> > power is the only reasonable way out ot this mess,
> > but see poitn1 above.
>
> So you don't think Marshall Savage's scheme to use OTECs to raise
> lots of spirulina and dump some of it (with the attendant carbon)
> to the ocean bottom will help? The scheme is described in his book
> THE MILLENIAL PROJECT along with several other poetically-portrayed
> engineering marvels. (Savage's book is also loaded with the most
> entertaining flights of disasturbation, but I have no trouble
> discounting that stuff. He's just trying to get people motivated,
> so I just pretend I'm reading Steven King.)
>
Actually, I really believe that we should just try to keep things
on a relatively even keel for the next 9 years or so. Most
attempts at fixing the system have up-front costs to the
ecology (an economy) that will not be recovered for 20 years
or so. However, our ability to fix this mess will get very
rapidly better. IMO, we'll hit the singularity. Therefore, it
actually makes sense to defer any attempt at massive improvement
in our use (abuse?) of the environment: we're likely to do
more harm than good, sort of like the attempts during the
last century to preserve ancient works of art. If the
preservationists had simply left the stuff alone, we'd
now be able to do a much better job. I realize that it sounds
as if I'm just waiting for the Tooth Fairy to come and
solve all our problems, but I'm not.