Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Lady Alyx

"Live Earth"

44 posts in this topic

...WOW did anyone watch any of this? I watched or at least listened to a large block of time of it. Saturday 07-07-07. Bravo broadcasted it all day long. Was great to see Madonna, Roger Waters, Bon Jovi, Police etc....

...Now see if we had voted for Al Gore ...lol...we would have no war but concerts...LOL.... :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do....., just not politically motivated music ., I wasnt really interested enough in the retoric . . or the non lead by example policy to catch any of it........, and to be completely honest., it makes me lose respect for some of the participants as a whole. you know Niel Young .,I aint singin for pepsi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea was well intended but 1 If you don't already know about global warming your in a coma. 2 Just to power the concerts most likely caused more pollution than I can create in ten years. To sum up my fellings I'll quote a song I'm pretty sure didn't get played at Live Earth..."don't tell me to ride a bus or turn down my thermastat. When your all riddin' round in jets and Cadillacs."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These "entertainers" need to figure out that nobody gives a flying fig about their opinions, political or otherwise. Shut up and sing! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These "entertainers" need to figure out that nobody gives a flying fig about their opinions, political or otherwise. Shut up and sing! :rolleyes:

Amen :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do....., just not politically motivated music ., I wasnt really interested enough in the retoric . . or the non lead by example policy to catch any of it........

:lol::lol:

(Well, that and I don't have my TV hooked up for any broadcast reception. GIGO)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..that topic was raised about the performers jetting around the earth to get to these concerts, but what I think they were after was to capture the young who will so to speak 'inherit the earth' that they might start doing something about it when they start running the show....I feel that we need to start now with doing things to cut pollution...it seemed a big topic in the 70's when I was a teen and very much influenced by Current Affair teachers in school. Since then it has not become a big priority. I think we need to resume our pollution watch, even if you don't follow all the global warming theory, it just makes good sense not to mess up your backyard...so to speak.

Besides all that...what a great venue to see a variety of artists for free for one day. I hope they have it taped I would buy one if it isn't too expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sincerely doubt that broad awareness of pollutant output has ever been higher than it has in the past few years. I've read that the younger generations are each progressively more environmentally concerned than previous generations. (Who can blame them with wild tales of melting Greenland and potential 20 foot rises in sea level being breathlessly reported? :lol: ) In fact, the financial paper I read talks quite extensively about how important an environmental awareness image is to many companies, especially in regard to 20 somethings.

I find this sort of fascinating, actually. Environmental concern has become a somewhat successful marketing ploy. Companies are cashing in on it. (About a quarter to a third of the Ford Motor Company tour called The Rouge that I went on recently was devoted to environmental processes put into place at the plant - from roof plants, to skylights, to effective parking lot filtration.) Stores are cashing in on it. (Wal~Mart has made much hay about this, but so have entire companies. Whole Foods has basically been built around green issue marketing.) Media outlets are certainly using it in their "bad news sells copies" campaigns. Even politicians (the ultimate marketing campaign) are using it to promote themselves. Al Gore has benefited tremendously by branding himself as a "green" candidate. He could even have another run, based primarily on this one, well-marketed point. Green is gold. {Edit: I had a feeling that was a good slogan. Check this out.)

I'm sure if you are sincerely interested in pollution awareness that a search of the net will find research supporting this. It's not quite as interesting as how many people watched an extended rock concert, but it's probably a lot more indicative of the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mission, that is exactly the tactic that is going to work. I watched a show called "The Power of the Sun" and in it they go into detail that is a way to capture their minds...by the wallet. If going green is profitable then it is more appealing. It made sense after it was described this way in the show. This morning on the news they brought up the topic about more Nuclear Plants being produced..I think it was 30 in the que overall for the U.S. They said that many are against it but since the big push of clean air and that nuc's don't make dirty air, they are starting to look at them again. What I don't understand is why they do not use more wind power here. I have two giant pinwheels that are garden decoration and they are constantly spinning cause I am right on the coast. We could have beautiful windmills along barren coastlines. Artisans could design the outside why brilliant minds could design the inards (for any improvements on the turbine that is...windpower is age old tech).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remeber an Energy Offical once talking about how there was a group opposed to every form of green energy for one reason or another. Wind power is possibly the most viable of all alt. Energy sources other than nuclear, and pherhaps hydro, but we ain't gonna build any more dams in this country and nuclear waste will always be a problem. Most people opposed to wind fall into one of two groups. Bird lovers and civic groups opposed to the "destruction of our scenery". Both these problems are seemingly minute but are why there aren't more wind plants. I for one am reasonbly sure my power is green as the two nearest power plants to my home are a hydro electric damn and a nuclear plant that hopes to add a new reactor. Future plans also include a wind farm off the Georgia cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well! We agree on something in regard to the environment. (I do not support most legislation designed to force the issue, however. I think time is green energy's greatest ally. Forcing the issue will only leave the residue of taxation and legal policy designed to squash freedom in place. Laws are like cockroaches - they hang out in the dark and never go away, living far beyond their useful life.)

Put your money where your mouth is and go buy a windmill, I say. You can sell all the extra energy you produce back to the electric company. They have these ginormous windmill in the (very) windy Mackinaw Straights between the lower and upper peninsulas in Michigan near the Mackinaw Bridge. I was thinking about them the other day - last time I was up there, I tried to get close to them, but they have it all fenced off.

mackinaw.mi.jpg

I am still considering solar power, myself. It's not cost effective yet. I believe a day will come when it will be one of the primary sources of energy - unless they figure something else out before it becomes cost-effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the page where I found that image has an interesting litany of letters about complaints that people have about the giant windmills - particularly in New York state. (It has to do with noise and light reflection.) You can check it out here.

As for dams...God forbid you should mess with anything whatsoever to do with wetlands. I doubt you could build most dams today because of the restrictions the idiotic wetlands legislation that has been created. (See? Cockroaches!)

I think solar is the most viable source currently. The only problem is that the cost of the refined silicon has shot up because of the demand for it from solar panels and chips. (Who'd have thought sand would get expensive? :lol: ) This isn't good for the solar market because the cost of power generation is currently 3-4 times higher than coal burning. Give it time, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mission,

Well I have to confess, I know a heck of a lot about solar power and I am amiss for not adding that along with Wind Power. I work for a well renowned aerospace company and we build all the large commercial and gov't sat's in the world. I work directly with the Solar Array department. Solar tech in our field is way higher than what's out there for commercial use and the strides are great, however it has not reached the commercial platform yet and I cannot go into detail of course. There are companies that do put up Solar Fields for energy I believe Nevada put one up recently.

Also you don't need dams, there is also wave technology at the beach that can be harnessed (again I remembered that from my science book in high school - 70's)

As to wind tech and birds I think they turn to slow for that...and about the ugliness problem....easy...have artists design them.

I went to the website and read the letters, it seems noise was the big factor and I agree with them on that. I think they should be in rural or industrial areas where there are no homes. I don't blame them for the noise. I live next to LAX and I know what turbines sound like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solar is my bet. Other than the need for space to place the panels and the storage problem (which is ubiquitous to all alternative energy schemes), it seems like the best and cleanest option to me. Unless something more cost effective that we haven't thought of or popularized yet shows up.

As for energy - it's everywhere; latent energy exists naturally in everything. We just need to figure out how to harness and gather it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sure wish they would get back on track for cars made with non-polluting substances...I get sick everytime I am behind those big trucks that spew those fumes...with the tech of today...look at the bleeding cell phones...why can't we...but wait, we probably have the tech..it's the almighty dollar and greed that is behind it.

I think wave power could also be harness, at docks etc. I still want to visit the new Whole Foods market they built up the street and ask the management if their store has the solar panels on top. In the show I previously mentioned "The Power of the Sun" they mentioned that Whole Foods markets are trending to do this with their stores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok time for the trucker to stand up and as an owner operator and a huge fan of the internal combustion engine I'd like to make a few quick points here.

1 The tech to make cleaner trucks not only exists but is being put into place. The new 2007 engine standards (By the way federal controls mandated changes in 2000,2007,and 2010.) not only changed the way the motor works but has once again changed the fuel we have to use in addition it also changes the engine oil we use. The 2007 engines (witch I do not yet own) are reasonably clean even by the standards of a 60's pickup truck. The 2010 standard is reffered to as a cleaner out than in as the exhaust from our trucks will have less pollution in ppm than the air in many major cities. The end result for me however is less money not only do the new motors make less power per cubic inch but the new fuel (witch more often than not is the only kind avalible) makes less power when it burns and costs more at the pump. Since I am the owner I pay for this lack of efficancy.

2 In regards to making things cleaner several really dumb laws have been and are being put into place for just this reason but like many laws they really only prove that the people who write them are idiots. For example in your home state of California it is a felony to leave a pet in the car if the engine is not running with the climate control on. It is however a misdemeanor for me to idle my truck over night in 100 degree heat...for a mandatory 10 hours! There are numerous other such examples especially in the state of California. For instance we do not in this country have small cars powered by deisal motors thanks to the C.A.R.B. ruling and auto manufactures unwillingness to produce a car ineligible for sell in Cali. However they do have these in Europe they have as good if not better mileage than hybrid cars. Have longer life spans and cause less environmental damage not only in their production but also in maint. and eventual disposal.

3 The internal combustion engine is the single greatest invention since the wheel. It has already bested electric, steam and every other form of propulsion that has been thrown up against it. Take for instance a comparison of Henry Ford and Leonardo Davinci. Now even though my blood runs blue oval blue I wouldn't say (nor would anyone else I'd wager) that Henry Ford was the smarter of the two. Yet each man shared a common experience and hence a common desire. They both witnessed their mothers work themselves to death in the hard life of subsitance farming. (organic substance farming I might add.) Both tried to invent ways to alleviate the agony and toil of farming but DaVinci failed and Ford succeeded why the internal combustion engine. All of Leonardo's designs in the agricultural line were abandoned as they were more tedious than the old ways...why lack of a power supply. Indeed a few years ago lawn mower engines were regulated by the EPA as they produced more pollution than a four cylinder car. To me this should not be considered a condemnation of the lawn mower but a success for the car.

Ok I have gone off on enough of a rant here I think. I apologize for it in that I do not mean to boar. Oh and Mission I really doubt Solar will be the path of the future I just don't see the cost coming down not just for production but the maintenance of the glass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solar costs have already fallen quite a bit as the technology of gathering and storage has improved. It will most likely continue to do so as awareness and concern increases.

I personally suspect that if solar becomes the replacement energy source of choice, the panels will be replaceable. Perhaps they will be like roof replacements - done every 10-30 years (which will then require cleaning as you suggest) ...or perhaps they'll be more like televisions- every 3-5 years.

This means the cost of the panels will have to fall dramatically, but why wouldn't it? Solar cells are a technology product. Look at the inflation adjusted price of VCRs or DVD players or any other technology product. If your DVD player fails after 3 years, you can replace it with an equivalent DVD player for a fraction of the original cost. (Although we often trade up to a better product instead.) Oddly, that means we'll probably be throwing them by the gross into landfills eventually... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These "entertainers" need to figure out that nobody gives a flying fig about their opinions, political or otherwise.  Shut up and sing!  :ph34r:

Amen :ph34r:

I second this!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People, please pull your collective heads out of your asses and wake up to some simple facts. Do a bit of research on how our Sun works.

To encapsulate the subtleties that seem to escape the vacuous, brain dead Al Gore groupies, here's how cosmology plays into it all. Forgive me for eschewing subtlety, but here's how the cosmos works.

The Sun is one massive fusion reactor. The more energy it creates, the larger the outer gas cloud, or heliosphere, expands. Now you and I know that such a reaction cannot last forever. But it can wreak havoc on our planet. Geology proves that out, in the form of large and small Ice Ages. It does not matter the number of cow farts or SUV's on the road. What matters is the interaction with the Sun and the Earth.

Geologists will tell you that in the overall scope of things on the Geological Clock, Man occupies the last 2 minutes before Midnight. So please, someone, justify to me how we're screwing up the planet? Earth is fully capable of shedding us off like we're nothing but a fleas. She's proved it time and again. She'll shuck us off like we were nothing. So, tell me: what's to fix?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, tell me: what's to fix?

That's easy. Git that Decrappio punk ta quit bitchin' on tv ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no denying that an anthropogenic Global Warming effect does exist. Even the skeptical scientists will grant you that one. The real question is how much of an impact it actually has. Most of the skeptics say it is minimal, at best.

As Jack says, the Sun is the primary cause of global temperature (actually, it's most if not all of it). Even the most ardent environmentalists (well, maybe not the evangelists) will admit that. However, there is a Greenhouse effect caused by the gases in the atmosphere that trap the sun's heat and cause more warming than would otherwise exist. In fact, without these gases, the earth would probably not be habitable in many places - perhaps not at all. See, there's a far larger non-anthropogenic portion of the Greenhouse Effect that's been around for much longer than we have.

So can we have an impact by changing our behavior? Definitely. Is it significant? Probably not. The measurement of the anthropogenic portion of Global Warming is sketchy and contains known errors in calculation. It also fails to take many other factors that effect the global temperature into account. See this thread for more on that. As I've said before, I think this recent surge in concern represents political elements grabbing for more funding by playing on fear. (There's a lot of governmental money to be procured by getting the populace worked up about something. A good scare can create an entire cottage industry - look at some of the money being made off the terrorism gig.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats the thing mission I doubt very seriously that the cost of solar will continue to decrease. Look at say computers yes we get a lot more for the 1800 smackers we pay for todays top end machine than we did for that of yester year but we still pay about $1800 for high end (or really now days mid range given the cost of gaming rigs) rigs as we did in the 80's. The cost of solar would have to drop a lot and then continue to improve in the same price point for it to become mainstream or anything like that. Plus I still see maintence as a major factor. In the end we are talking about roofing our homes with glass. No matter how resilant of a glass still glass. Imagine the increased cost of home owners insurance. Not to mention many people fail to do the basic roof maint. required for asphalt shingles. Would these same people then maintain a glass roof. Plus without said maint. wouldn't the efficancy drop greatly. I just think it's got to be stupid simple and or taken care of by industry not home owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats the thing mission I doubt very seriously that the cost of solar will continue to decrease.  Look at say computers yes we get a lot more for the 1800 smackers we pay for todays top end machine than we did for that of yester year but we still pay about $1800 for high end (or really now days mid range given the cost of gaming rigs) rigs as we did in the 80's.

True, but you're comparing apples to oranges. You could buy a computer like the one you bought in the 80s for less than $10 today. And computers as a product have matured to the point where the price is fairly acceptable to the average consumer. When desk-top computers first came out they were much more expensive than most people were willing to pay but once the price dropped to the point where mainstream acceptance occurred, the product took off. Solar is a young product, not yet matured, so I believe the price will continue to fall because of volume component purchase savings, and production technology improvements. This will continue to occur until the price becomes acceptable to the average consumer. At that point, the price will stabilize, while technology will continue to improve as it has done with computers. Unless something better than solar comes along, that is.

On top of all that, accepting your proposition that a complete rig is $1800 today as it was in the 80s, when you consider inflation, it is much cheaper to buy a computer today than it was in the 80s. For example, spending $1800 in 1989 would be roughly equivalent to spending $2950 today (from The Inflation Calculator which is based on the US Gov't Consumer Price Index). Spending $1800 in 1981 would be roughly equivalent to $4250 today. So even if the numbers are the same, the net effect would be that the computer is cheaper in today's dollars.

The cost of solar would have to drop a lot and then continue to improve in the same price point for it to become mainstream or anything like that.

Which I think will happen as solar starts becoming more mainstream. It's how the market works in the US (and, increasingly, worldwide). If consumers start to embrace something, all other things being equal, more companies will produce it, more creative minds will be brought to bear on the problems of production and cheaper ways will be found to make it. So the effective price will drop. It's basically what happened with computers in the Introduction and Growth stages of their product lifecycle curves (I would say solar power is in the early Growth stage at this point. Some of the newer designs are in the Introduction stage.) As globalization has improved, this process keeps happening faster and faster.

Plus I still see maintence as a major factor.  In the end we are talking about roofing our homes with glass. No matter how resilant  of a glass still glass. Imagine the increased cost of home owners insurance. Not to mention many people fail to do the basic roof maint. required for asphalt shingles. Would these same people then maintain a glass roof. Plus without said maint. wouldn't the efficancy drop greatly.

Good points.

I believe the glass issue is probably less of a problem than you might think. Modern manufacturers take this into account by using high-impact resistant glass and other, similar precautions. I can't speak intelligently to the insurance issue because I haven't looked into it.

In my thought projection of a possible solar future, you will be able to buy these reasonably-sized solar panels that more or less plug into some sort of master bus system on your roof. When one gets destroyed or ceases to function, you will be able to unplug and replace it.

As for efficiency, one possibility is that the things will have some sort of feedback in them to advise the homeowner when they are not working properly. Besides, we basically have the same problem of efficiency with standard heating systems, don't we? I could dramatically increase the efficiency of my hot water system by regularly cleaning the fins on the heat registers, but...well...you know. (Although I do clean them once a year...) I used to have a forced air system and then you had the issue of maintaining the furnace regularly (which I imagine most people don't) and replacing the air filter at least monthly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mission I most heartily agree that should solar power go mainstream the price will continue to fall then stabalize with following improvments taken in at the same price point. I just don't think solar will gain that level of popularity. Here of course we can only wait and see however I really do believe that although no one would argue agianst "green" energy very few will do much to realise it from their end. I grant you numerous people have already made the switch to solar but the trials involved scare away most. In addition there would almost certainly be a consderable intial outlay in cash. In these times of ecnomic hardships few will be willing and or able to lay out these funds in cash or credit. No if I'm right the switch to renewable energy will take place largly within the power company's themselves. Also I had fun with the Inflation calculator . Just for kicks I plugged in the MSRP of a 2008 Ford Taurus and a 1920's model T. Works out something like this,

1920's Model T = $300 (lowest price in production run)

adjusted price = $3385.76 in 2006

2008 Taurus = $23245 (baseline)

adjusted price = $2059.65 in 1920

Thats about a thousand less than for a baseline series 59 Caddy(four door touring with seating for seven), or about $11,000 less than a baseline Model J Duesenberg . :ph34r: Man I need a time machine get a model J for less than an econo box :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0