| Re: debate 6 discussion. final debate
Independent thinker points that the longest CO2 record is on Mauna Loa. That is instrumental.
However we can also get CO2 concentrations from Ice cores. So though correct, not entirely so.
Also Independent does not point to the fact that the current CO2 concentration spike is 100% anthropogenic in origin which is also accountable for the excess CO2 in the atmosphere and is what is off setting the balance of our planet's delicate climate system.
On Tot's side, sorry, however in terms of energy density there is no way to bypass the use of liquid based fuels.
Hydrogen is not practical not because of the generation of water as the by-product as even so water is still in equilibrium within the environment through the generation of hydrogen to begin with. Hydrogen is not attractive because it's a ticking time bomb just waiting to go off as well as the physical barrier needed to overcome with specific regards to again, energy density of the fuel source. It's great mass to energy ratio certainly, but in everyday driving for the masses volume to energy ratio is what is important which is why we still use gasoline, it's very energetic.
Tot does bring up the very good point that we need more nuke plants, it's just inevitable and impractical to continue on current trends of fossile fuel usage.
It's a shame however that tot does not provide a basis for why Ethanol is no better for the environment and he feels that electric cars are the way to go.
It's inevitable that cars are going to be electric, however the fuel source will most likely be from the fuel cell conversion from liquid fuels such as ethanol and or butanol which provide energy densities 100 fold greater then that of hydrogen, as well as the added stability, ease of transportation and storage and much faster charge rate then any battery available, and the final reason is the transition would be immediately avaiable today, not 10, 20, 30 years in the future. |