ISideWith 2016 US President Election

[otto-san]

If the US gets a president who actually gives a crap about global warming, they can get other countries to cooperate.

i'm ready for the Bern

only problem i have is that idk if the Bern could end up actually winning the election :(

[Ad Bot]

[Cappytaino]

Fuel cell busses are already in the works, being developed and researched by several companies. If their technology makes it to cars and becomes affordable, it could mean another significant reduction in global warming, but only, and I stress this, if other countries cooperate. Countries like china really don't like changing their ways, only recently did they start to switch to nuclear energy plants. As of now they're predominantly using coal for power, but with the construction of 24 new nuclear power plants that should change in the next 10-15 years. Hopefully that's soon enough.

If the US gets a president who actually gives a crap about global warming, they can get other countries to cooperate.

The key word is global, though. Greenhouse gas doesn't just float above the country it was produced in, it is a global thing. Literally every industrial power has to cooperate in ceasing production of greenhouse gases. I'm just doubtful we can get China to agree.

[Tom Gunn]

i'm ready for the Bern

only problem i have is that idk if the Bern could end up actually winning the election :(

I think Bernie has the highest chances of anyone to win the election given all the positive publicity he's had so far

[otto-san]

also this is unrelated to the current discussion but it's related to the discussion as a whole and it is very important

Ted Cruz Auditions for The Simpsons

i was just sent this and please help me

[Maxwell.]

I preferred it when you said zinger

please understand that there has to be sacrifices made in life

[Plethora]

The number of people who agree strongly with Sanders here scares me.  I should ready my passport.

[ZSNO]

I was more making the argument that alternative energy isn't really there yet

You literally ONLY made that argument within the last page. How big of an ego do you have to think I can somehow tell the future on what you're going to say in 10 minutes?

Uh carbon emissions are not really that big of a problem. Water vapor is one of the more prevalent greenhouse gases, and methane from livestock is a bigger contributor to global warming than automobiles.

Global warming can't be denied, but what is causing it is debatable.

Source for that table?

I retract my statement for methane being a large contributor, but, assuming the numbers are correct, wouldn't the main problem be evaporation? Carbon emissions may contribute a small part, but water vapor appears to be the larger culprit. Damn nature warming the Earth.

Also loving volcanoes and their carbon emmissions
Source about halfway down the page

Still doesn't address volcanic activity as a factor. At an estimated potential of 30,000 tons of carbon dioxide per day per volcano times 1500 estimated active volcanoes, that's 45,000,000 tons of carbon dioxide per day just from volcanoes alone. That's a stuff load of carbon dioxide that we can't really stop from getting out.

And this is the first mention of anything having to do with technology:

Nothing is preventing us, but the technology really isn't there yet.

Talk about dense? :^)

[Gojira]

i am not surprised

[otto-san]

The number of people who agree strongly with Sanders here scares me.  I should ready my passport.

you should Bern your passport XDXDXDXDXD

[Maxwell.]

you should Bern your passport XDXDXDXDXD

hillaryous.

[Cappytaino]

You literally ONLY made that argument within the last page. How big of an ego do you have to think I can somehow tell the future on what you're going to say in 10 minutes?

And this is the first mention of anything having to do with technology:Talk about dense? :^)

I would agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong, and that wouldn't be the mature, well-informed response. I've rescinded the portions of my statement that were able to be proven wrong, as any reasonable person is wont to do. Look, I don't care what people on these forums say about you, but I want to believe that you're smart, but you're proving to me that I was gravely mistaken.

[Gojira]

you should Bern your passport XDXDXDXDXD

hillaryous.

-candidate pun-

[Ipquarx]

The key word is global, though. Greenhouse gas doesn't just float above the country it was produced in, it is a global thing. Literally every industrial power has to cooperate in ceasing production of greenhouse gases. I'm just doubtful we can get China to agree.

The US has a lot of leverage in this world, which the US can use to its advantage. It can for example, declare that China's greenhouse gas emissions are too high to reasonably accept, and they could put a sanction on trades and exports until they shut down the majority of their coal plants. (Yes, I'm aware this would hurt the economy. No, I'm not an economic expert by any definition of the word, but it's a small price to pay to save the world.) Do note, though, that they are building more renewable energy. For example, they just dammed one of the worlds largest rivers to make the largest hydroelectric dam ever. 22Gigawatts of power. They're also making nuclear power, lots of it, as I said. That could be enough to make a difference assuming they shut down their coal plants.

[Cappytaino]

The US has a lot of leverage in this world, which the US can use to its advantage. It can for example, declare that China's greenhouse gas emissions are too high to reasonably accept, and they could put a sanction on trades and exports until they shut down the majority of their coal plants. (Yes, I'm aware this would hurt the economy. No, I'm not an economic expert by any definition of the word, but it's a small price to pay to save the world.) Do note, though, that they are building more renewable energy. For example, they just dammed one of the worlds largest rivers to make the largest hydroelectric dam ever. 22Gigawatts of power. They're also making nuclear power, lots of it, as I said. That could be enough to make a difference assuming they shut down their coal plants.

Putting sanctions on China would be economic Self Delete. Saving the world is a noble cause, but trashing our own economy is dangerous as well.

[Ipquarx]

Putting sanctions on China would be economic Self Delete. Saving the world is a noble cause, but trashing our own economy is dangerous as well.

They could also threaten to put economic sanctions, which could scare china into doing it anyways. It's a hell of a lot more dangerous to be playing with the fate of the entire earth rather than a couple of countries.