From eufocus:
"The year is 2050. Forty-two years after the cost of oil skyrocketed to nearly $150 a barrel, fossil fuels play a minor role in the world’s energy supply. Geopolitics no longer revolve around oil and gas resources, and the air and water are cleaner than they have been in decades. Conventionally-powered cars in major cities have given way to smart interconnected transport systems; those cars that do remain are electric or hybrid vehicles. Worldwide greenhouse gas emissions have dropped to 50 percent of 1990 levels, while global GDP has continued to grow. This sounds like science fiction today."
As the post heading intimates, as the 'science' has not yet been proved the opening paragraph remains just that - fiction!
Do read the link as there is little therein that will not affect just about every aspect of our lives.
8 comments:
And there they go again with the term "fossil". Oil and other hydrocarbons are abiogenic. There are wells that refill themselves from pressures below. Darweze in C. Asia has been burning for decades. Oil preceded life, not vice versa!
This is the sort of garbage that gets pushed when you have civil servants "reinterpretting" what the scientists say, then asking Greenpeace "experts" to put it into language the media will print ...
I'm delighted to see Adam R's comment - "fossil fuel" is coal - oil and gas are, as he says, Abiogenic - generated in the mantle and condensed on the rock layers once they penetrate and accumulate in fissures beneath denser rock layers.
AR & TGM: I did say, on reflection, that it had become a religion.
abiogenesis?? Please guys, i'm beginning to really like this blog, but i'm not sure how many more times i can splurt coffee over my monitor without doing it some serious damage.
jk, The abiotic theory seems to make more sense to me as methane, one of the most basic hydrocarbons, has been found on Titan. That isn't a place that I could picture dinosaurs, cattle or any life, save for some bacteria living. I have been reading up on the scientific literature about this. I never understand why people dismiss it. It's not like saying that unicorns produce it through defecation, although Greenpeace would probably accept that statement as fact.
Any belief system which runs counter to proven facts is, by definition, a religion. As governments here and across Europe seem to want a secular society can we encourage them to debunk this AGW/ACCC fundamentalism? Can we ban the mad monks of this crackpot sect from our shores? Could we force them to read http://joannenova.com.au/ until they see the light? Better to throw them into the lower dungeons beneath the Vatican in the company of a master torturer. Repent ye sinners, for your end is nigh!
jkg & AR: Do carry on - I'm enjoying the banter........
a5759: Nope, to time consuming - we just hang the b'stards!
Adam, isn't the whole reason whyy people are excited about methane on titan because it points to the possibility of life there.
Now my (admittedly limited) understanding is that abiogenesis has been largely abandoned because other models and theories fit the evidence better and because abiogenesis fails tests it should pass. While its by no means a thorough examination this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin#The_geological_argument_against is a decent stab at explaining.
I'm nervous posting wikipedia entries here because the idea of peer review doesnt seem particularly welcome but that IS how science and broadly speaking wikipedia, works.
again apologies for poor spelling, i'm abroad at the moment and the computer wants everything in scandiwegian
Post a Comment