Can someone give me some good news about the whole global warming crisis?

What's some latest breakthroughs or technologies that are helping us combat global warming. Whatever happened with the whole hybrid car thing. When the hell are they going to catch on?

11 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Although many (but not as many as you might think) call me green and liberal, I actually quite like bike, cars and the technology that goes into them. I have also followed the developments in these for many years like the failed Vectrix motorbike and the Toyota Prius, While I don't agree with a lot of Jeremy Clarkson's (from Top Gear) ideas on many things, I do agree with him on the Prius it just doesn't work as an idea, it's to expensive, is not that green and has fuel economy (for all that cost) that is not as good a similarly sized European diesel car. But this is still new technology as an exercise in getting people used to the idea of electric (albeit partially electric) vehicles the Prius did have an effect. But now we are starting to see more serious vehicles like the Volt, were the Prius could cover only about 1km in fully electric mode, the Volt can cover more like 40 miles, kick in the small engine used to recharge the battery and it can cover more ground for less fuel than any diesel. Still expensive but not as much pound for pound as the Prius.

    Both Mitsubishi & Nissan have now launched fully electric small cars, charged from the grid, such vehicles emit (even if the power is coal based) ~25% of the emissions of running a car directly on petrol to cover the same driving distance, a 75% reduction in Co2 emissions, If the power source is something greener like hydro or wind than the emissions are far far less.

    A move away from coal to wind and solar is going to have other flow on effects, improved air quality, better quality of life for those with asthma or respiratory problems.

    Deniers rather boring and repetitive claim is that "alarmists" want us to live the way we did in the old west or even cavemen days, when in fact it's is improved technology that will aid us in fighting the problem of AGW. Car for instance made of carbon fiber, make the car lighter, 50-60% lighter and even with a petrol engine the fuel saving are great, as a lighter car needs a smaller engine to travel at the same speed, a lighter car needs less breaking to stop, lighter suspension, a smaller fuel tank all are benefits of reducing the mass and a car with a smaller engine and fuel tank could have the interior space of a large car thanks to these size reductions, a car made of much lighter (but stronger) materials like carbon would also make a better electric car, as under it's skin the Prius is the same steel construction of the decades of cars that have gone before it, the Rocky Mountain Institute have already built such a car, the technology is not new and it works, but car companies are quite conservative and don't want to change and it take to economy of scale that major manufacturers get through building by the 100's of thousands to bring prices down. If you look at the cost of the motor car before ford introduced the production line. When cars where still hand built, such cars cost several times the average salary of the time, scale that to today and a Toyota Corolla would cost several hundred thousand dollars.

    http://move.rmi.org/markets-in-motion/case-studies...

  • 8 years ago

    There's no good news about global warming. The harm caused by all the pollution and everything we're doing to the environment is much more then the good that is being done by advancement in technology. We're really going to have to face an apocalypse like situation if things go on this way.

    Source(s): The world around me
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    The good news is the Earth has actually been the coolest its ever been for the last 20 years. The American people as well as around the globe to profit on lying about it.

  • 4 years ago

    See the technological know-how component to the NYT for Wednesday, April sixteen, 2008. "President Bush is desperate to place out for the 1st time a particular long-term objective for proscribing the atmospheric buildup of greenhouse gases appropriate to international warming and a few skill the united states will use to realize it. He pledged final three hundred and sixty 5 days to extract via the top of 2008 a shared long-term objective of this style from the dozen or so international places responsible for 80 5 p.c. of emissions of carbon dioxide and different warmth-trapping gases — alongside with popular financial powers and rising giants led via China and India. a meeting of that team of “substantial economies,” via fact the Bush administration describes the worlds greatest gasoline emitters, is scheduled in Paris Thursday and Friday. final three hundred and sixty 5 days, Mr. Bush pronounced the objective would not be binding, and administration officers pronounced this became the only thank you to get prevalent contract. yet he pronounced countries could could teach their dedication via itemizing strikes, alongside with necessary steps, they could take regionally in coming many years to proceed to exist music. Parallel talks could proceed on a clean climate treaty, to be negotiated via the top of 2009." i think of that the american public is going to go through no longer from the effects of international warming, yet from the governments rulings and strikes which will fee the american customer at a time whilst money is tight. image voltaic ability isn't unfastened. Water ability isn't unfastened and wind ability expenditures a equipment too. who is going to pay for the retrofits of each thing? i like the belief of image voltaic, Wind and Water ability. i do no longer in ordinary terms like the fee. AND THE CORN situation FOR ETHANOL IS ALREADY DISASTEROUS FOR third international international places....PLUS much less WHEAT IS BEING PLANTED AND for this reason BREAD expenditures ARE turning out to be speedy.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 8 years ago

    Where I live Global Warming hasn't been headline news in about 5 years, giving the impression that its become a sort of null issue. That said research is still being done on the subject, though perhaps not as furiously as a few years ago. If you want some good news here it is; Global Warming is a natural process of climate fluctuations that have happened across all climatic eras (we're currently in the Holocene), and in previous eras heralded Ice Ages and Inter-glacial periods with more thawed out conditions. Across the millenia there have also been little surges in climate - even within recorded history there are reports of these events, for example studies on ancient tree rings show that during the Roman and Medieval periods in Europe (not sure about the chronology in other areas of the world, sorry) temperatures were on average 1-2 degrees C warmer than they are now, and we've been cooling ever since. Admittedly human contributions such as pollution might be contributing to speeding up global warming, but I think all in all many people underestimate the Earths ability to adapt and deal with catastrophic events (and lets face it, we are pretty much that).

    Source(s): An Archaeologist
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    The good news is that clean energy can supply all of our energy needs. There are a number of new energy sources; solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, hydro, tidal

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Cotton shorts and flip flops with great arch support are the latest things helping us combat global warming.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    The good news its a hoax a money making scheme .

  • 8 years ago

    People are still making too much money off of oil to go to a truely sustainable energy, we have HUGE developments that are almost done to make solar much more efficient and new methods to use geothermal without causing earth quakes,

  • 8 years ago

    The good news is, is that it never was. It is just a political stunt to grab our money and enslave us with tyrannical laws.

    It is not a scientific problem. It is a political ruse.

    Quote by Ottmar Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official: "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy...Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization...One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."

    The electric car has proven to have a bigger carbon footprint than a gas guzzler by the time you figure the power plant energy, line loss, conversion efficiency, battery disposal etc.. For instance, the batteries now last for about four years then have to be replaced at a price of about $4000. How many cars would Ford sell if you had to replace the motor every 50,000 miles?

    The car probably does not 'pollute' as much as a Volt when you figure the Volt is replenished with electricity which is made by some 'pollution spewing' power plant when you figure the initial electrical generation, line loss, and final power conversion inefficiency. And as far as gasoline usage never in all modern mankind has there ever been a better payback. Gasoline is a byproduct of the oil we pump out of the ground. Before the invention of the gasoline engine there was no use for gasoline. We needed lubrication and lamp fuel so instead of whale oil the world switched to petroleum. When you take a barrel of crude oil out of the ground you have to refine it to make it useful. This refining process at one time had some left overs or unusable material which is usually called byproduct and this was disposed by dumping it into creeks, rivers, streams, oceans or any other readily available disposable place. That's real man made pollution. Around the mid 1870s a German inventor invented the Ottocycle which was the first practical application of converting the dormant gasoline into mechanical energy. Now instead of throwing it away we use it for many useful purposes via the gasoline engine. Could you imagine the pollution of our natural resources if there were no gasoline engine? Take for instance, at this point in time we are not driving the amount we were in the past due to the economy so our gasoline usage is less. What do we do with the overflow of gasoline? We ship it abroad. At this time we are the world's largest exporter of gasoline, not petroleum products but gasoline only.

    Today when a plant has pollution they clean up the air with TOs (Thermal Oxidizers) or RTOs (Regenerative Thermal Oxidizers) where some of the byproduct of manufacturing is burned off (to put it in simple terms). This process uses other resources to gain the heat to crack the pollutant's molecules and give off clean air. So we use energy to clean the air of combustibles.

    The automobile will take this pollutant gasoline and convert it to a much less pollutant much the same way as the TOs do only we don't use any external energy to do this and we convert the gasoline into usable mechanical energy. That is a win/win situation.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.