TrYpt / PhEnEtHyl -AMinE said:
Its come to my attention that many of the energy alternatives and biodegradable products pushed by eco-friendly organizations actually have one major downfall: they increase the amount of carbon dioxide put into the atmosphere which increases the rate of global warming. Where corn PLA resins reduce the amount of non-degradable plastics in land fills, the decomposition process of corn PLA produces carbon dioxide. And as for fuel alternatives, many of them, although from renewable resources, still release large amounts of carbon dioxide, for example, ethanol fuels for cars. Has anyone else noticed this strange antagonism that is present in trying to solve a variety of the problems facing the earth? It seems that in a lot of cases, what solves one environmental problem leads to another.
Here's the difference. A product made from petroleum releases carbon into the atmosphere that had been locked under the earth from a very very long time ago when there was much more CO2 in the atmosphere and the climate was very different than today.
A 'biofuel' made from crops, on the other hand, only releases the carbon that the plant absorbed during it growth, and is therefore labelled 'carbon neutral' (assuming that renewable energy is used for its processing). The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere stays the same. Also, petroleum is apparently going to run out, and only certain countries have access, so developing alternatives is a necessity to sustain modern society.
It is true that biofuels are a stopgap until cleaner technologies like wind power and hopefully the hydrogen car take over. Alternative technologies used to be economically uncompetitive but this is beginning to change. A lot of environmentalists are actually dead against biofuels, because of the real risk of food shortages as farmers switch from food to fuel production.
There are other problems with plastics, such as toxic softening chemicals like bisphenol-A, which can leach into the food products they contain, one of the reasons why non-petroleum food packaging is a step in the right direction. Bisphenol A has now been banned in many countries (its effects interestingly are pretty much a who's who of Western health concerns) but can slip through the net due to globally outsourced manufacturing. It's not considered the only dubious softening chemical. There's the problem of the 'plastic island' floating in the Pacific and the gender bending consequences of fish eating this waste (and us eating the fish), as well as the toxicity of manufacturing PVC etc.
The Green movement is still in its infancy technology wise, since the idea of 'alternative technology' arose from the social dissatisfaction of the 1960s counterculture and the emerging spectre of climate change. Calculating which alternatives are the most 'green' can be very complicated, balancing social with ecological as well as the life cycle or footprint calculations alone, so I think it's unfair when people who are genuinely trying to help are lampooned by the public if they get it wrong. Of course, it's still very important than when they do get it wrong, the fault is identified and we move closer to a sustainable future. Within the Green movement alone, there are different factions, such as pro-technology, neo-Luddite, or the dreaded neo-liberal geo-engineers (shudders).
The climate is a chaotic system, and it is impossible to predict what's about to happen... the data governments rely on is 10 years out of date by the time they ever act on it, yet predictions seem to worsen on a yearly basis.
I recently read an article in New Scientist on hydrothermal carbonisation, a process inspired from the ancient Amazonian practice of 'slash and char' agriculture, which locks carbon in the soil and makes it more fertile and self-renewing in the process. I think carbon sink technology is our only hope. This black earth can still be found in the Amazon (the natives lost the knowledge long ago, and it is thought that the arrival of the Spanish and the unpredictability and disease that that brought led to the change to 'slash and burn').
imachavel said:
I bet tons of people knew the world was round when everyone thought it was fuckin flat.
I'm pretty sure you're right. I can't remember sources but I've watched documentaries from reasonably reputable sources that claim to expose the 'the earth is flat' story as a historical myth, and I believe they're right.
Sinewave said:
One of my ultimate goals is to have an off-grid house with subsistence permaculture. This ensures a much greater degree of immunity to bull-shit geopolitical happenings.
A great goal Sinewave, and one I share! I'm sure you're aware of these books, but here they are just in case, for you and anyone else dreaming of the good life. I used to go out with a girls whose Dad participated in the government LSD trials in the 60s- he now lives on his own little smallholding with a goat and a well (he refuses to drink tap water because he says the government put mind-control chemicals in it!).
The Complete Book of Self Sufficiency, John Seymour, 1976 (the older ones have better pictures than the modern reprint)
For construction (and nice intro on the holistic, philosophical side of alternative technology):
The New Autonomous House, Brenda and Robert Vale, Thanes and Hudson, 2002
Outdated in parts but some nice DIY ideas:
Radical Technology, Godfrey Boyle and Peter Harper ed., Wildwood House, 1976