CO2: the scandal of carbon scholarships

[chatelot16]

it is true that to cultivate in a region too hot, the shadow of solar collector would not be enough ... one would have to be also greenhouse completely closed to retain the water ... or I know only that I do not even imagine that culture is not my specialty!

in any case we are already able to make nuclear gas plant ... we could also do other

what I wanted to say is that you have to make gas plants for energy purposes you have to do them without competing with existing food crops: if you build something completely different if it works so much better, if it does not work it does not matter if we have not destroyed anything to do it

[Ahmed]

Yes, you are absolutely right and this is a point that I emphasized in the message above, the engine of our cars should never come before what ensures (or should ensure) the sustenance of humanity .

I strongly doubt that large-scale projects, whatever they are, can be considered harmless: all construction is at the same time destruction and the example of nuclear power is not really relevant ... (nuclear electricity no. 'appears a "good deal" only because the negative externalities are not taken into account).

[dede2002]

Quite simply, one could compare energy monocultures (and also food crops) to nuclear power plants.
We have a seemingly cheap product whose price does not take into account the destruction and pollution generated.

We should also be wary of clichés like "immense expanses where nothing grows" because it is a vision of motorized visitors, it is not that of the inhabitants of the place!

[Ahmed]

This argument could, in turn, be generalized: most great economic successes can only be labeled as such because the negative externalities I spoke of above are never taken into account.
This is understandable intuitively in terms of physical balance, which is won on one side is lost on the other.

Warning ! I am not speaking only in terms of balance sheets, since certain negative externalities cannot, by nature, enter into this framework.
Yet it is these which are the most important: decrease in biodiversity, restriction of freedoms, weakening of drinking water stocks, impoverishment of populations, etc.

[chatelot16]

I do not understand this way of being against everything that is new and complicated

if we had kept the method of cultivation and manufacturing of the millennium before there would be no pollution: the world population would remain limited by famine

thanks to technical progress, there is no longer famine in France for a long time ... there are even large examples of food resources because we think more about energy for heating and transport

we have made enough technical progress to avoid famine ... but we have not made any political progress to manage the world: I even think that we have made regression: the small government of the preceding milenaries was necessarily better for to exist with limited means ... now the abundance of technical means allows criticable government to squander no matter how ... or to make laws pushing to waste even more

so technical means to better cultivate or better work exist ... but something is missing to be able to do well ... and as the absurd realization is not lacking I can understand the systematic opposition of some, saying rather nothing that n I do not understand anything, considering the harmful things I've seen

we are here to discuss and possibly to move from anything not understood to a thing worthy of study

when I talk about my desire to make artificial culture: I also think that it can correct mistakes when the damage is done: for example there is in Spain large areas that have been massacred by irrigation by pumping in phreatic ground slightly salty: as the water evaporates on the surface, the irrigated area has become salty and sterile!

to correct the shot it would be necessary to desalt the water and irrigate even more under glass so as not to lose the water by evaporation ... what idea to make greenhouse where it is already too hot ... bin yes it is for water not for heat, and to avoid heat it takes a solar gas plant in the same project

if one day you have to do this kind of thing you have to do it in the right place to have a real benefit (not just in the accounting sense)

[Ahmed]

To understand the world as it is, it is not enough to note that great progress (in any case of great changes) has been made in the technical field and to believe that in the political field evolution has not followed (or even regressed).

In reality, these two evolutions are intimately linked and it is from this conclusion that it is possible to try to analyze its functioning and its dynamics.

The question of success in the production of commodities (in the broad sense) is not debated, unless that of the framework in which it occurs; I won't go into details that you should know.
What should overwhelmingly condemn this system, in the eyes of those who admire it without nuances, is that it is only a brief episode with no future.

With its inevitable collapse, if we persist, which everything suggests, in the denial of reality, famines will start again; what was a blessed time for some, to the detriment of others, will then only be a bitter memory ...

[dede2002]

I do not understand this way of being against everything that is new and complicated

Hello chatelot,

I also appreciate your knowledge, your ideas and your way of explaining (I understood many things by reading your writings).

For my part, I am not against what is new, but I am very suspicious of large projects, even more so if it is "among others".

What I have seen on the ground is that the smaller a project is, the more efficient it is.
And the bigger it is the more inefficient, even destructive, and far removed from the needs of the first concerned, the inhabitants of the place.

We all live on the same planet, but those who consume the most want to impose crops "to compensate for their pollution" on those who consume the least, I find that unacceptable.

Currently the number of undernourished people is equal to the world population at the time of the famine in France ...

In your example of saline land in Spain, the cost of reclaiming the land will probably be greater than the profits generated by a few years of strawberry production.

Now we must of course seek solutions to repair the damage, but without generating others ...

A+