>renewable energy will solve global warming

Heat death of the universe will solve global warming.

>>8993529
Not really, cows are the really thing we need to think about it

>>8994664
Increase meat and milk price.
Stop telling people to eat 1 kg of meat per day and to drink milk.
Decrease production to fit the demand.
Problem solved.

>>8996333
>Increase meat and milk price.
You treat the economy as though it were a human artifact instead of a natural process. Price manipulation is dangerous.
>Stop telling people to eat 1 kg of meat per day and to drink milk.
Do you think that'll stop people from doing that? People don't do this because they are told so, they do it,
>Decrease production to fit the demand.
Again, planned economies don't work very well.

File: total_0.png (44KB, 411x457px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 411x457px

>>8993529
>it won't solve the issue therefore it doesn't even help

>>8997813
>People don't do this because they are told so, they do it
Do you understand how advertising works, anon? Whether you like it or not, advertising sells products. That's why companies do it. People on TV tell you to eat at McDonalds, and you eat at McDonalds. You might think you're above advertising and that it doesn't work on you in particular, in which case congratulations. You're a special snowflake in a world that is still heavily influenced by advertising. The problem hasn't been solved.

>You treat the economy as though it were a human artifact instead of a natural process. Price manipulation is dangerous.
The economy is, by definition, a human artifact. Also, if you tax something, people buy less of that thing. This is beyond simple economics - when states raise the tax on cigarettes, people smoke less. That's not dangerous, that's a 4th grader's understanding of the economy. Taxing meats and subsidizing agriculture with lower carbon footprints isn't going to destroy our food industry, it's going to steer it in a more environmentally healthy direction.

People have such ridiculous black and white ideas of the world.
>>8994664
>>8996333
Meat and milk aren't 100% of the problem, but they are significant. Yes, we need to work on it, no it isn't an be all end all solution

>>8997813

>You treat the economy as though it were a human artifact instead of a natural process. Price manipulation is dangerous.

So are subsidies to reduce the cosr dangerous as well?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-touts-fruit-and-vegetables-while-subsidizing-animals-that-become-meat/2011/08/22/gIQATFG5IL_story.html?utm_term=.36595ef2c404

>>8998221
It does more harm than good. Increasing rare earth metal mining and refining by factors won't do any good.
Nuclear and closed chemical loops are the only alternatives.

>>8998290
Its not that mass producing modern renewable energy is a good idea - its that we should divert some of our (massive) spending on oil infrastructure into researching better renewable alternatives. They exist, we know that much at least, but we need to figure out how to do it on a global scale. And then we need to do it. It's a process that will undoubtedly take 50+ years, likely a lot more, which is why it needs to start sooner rather than later.

>>8993529
Global warming is not to be solved. It can merely be mitigated their effects be managed, agriculture adapted..

But yeah, if you want to help with the mitigation - lay off the meat, milk and rice.

>>8994664
>>8998244
Earth scientist here. Stop listening to PETA. Cows and other livestock are not even considered.

Cows don't get carbon from space. They get it from the plants they eat. Plants don't get carbon from space, they get it from the atmosphere. So atmospheric carbon becomes sugars, becomes methane, returns to the atmosphere where it breaks down into carbon dioxide to be absorbed by plants again.

It's a zero sum game.The only minor contribution livestock has on climate change is when they convert CO2 to methane because methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 but methane has a residence time of only 2-5 years in the atmosphere so it's contribution is almost irrelevant.

The problem is when you pull carbon out of rock and burn it.

>>8998264
You're treating those two things as though you had to choose one or the other when that's clearly not the case. You can choose neither and trust the market.

>>8993529
>using energy will solve global warming

Top Kek.

Why not making fossil fuels a closed cycle?

We just need a way to massively gather CO2 from the atmosphere and then making oil from it.

>>8998805
That's called "farming".

phytoplankton global cooling theory saves the world.
global warming? it's lie.

Look at this USGS article
>Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas >than carbon dioxide, but the removal of >carbon dioxide from the atmosphere where >the study was conducted more than offset the >potential warming effect of the methane >emissions that were observed.

I will solve global warming.

>>8998244
Mcdonalds advertises lobster rolls and mcribs, that doesn't mean I'm gonna go to McDonalds and buy them. Hell mcdonalds has apples, salad, coffee, pastries, all sorts of shit they advertise and sell. However I'm going to buy a mcdouble and fries because they're fucking delicious and I LIKE THEM AND I WANT THEM.

>subsidizing
>taxing
>carbon footprint

Yeah when people don't want what you're selling then put big brother on their doorstep and force them to pay for nonsense that a small portion of the population is pushing. Do you really think that's going to flyover well? No get out, everyone doesn't want their money going to nonsense they don't want. You can tax whatever the hell you like they'll only go to a cheaper or illegal alternatives. Tax meat and you will only impoverish meat eaters or if what you say comes to pass and people do stop buying less meat then what happens to the meat sellers?

>Oh right that part of the economy would crumble.
>b-but that's a good thing! Meat eaters are bad because of muh global warming!

>>8998244
>The economy is, by definition, a human artifact.
Not even close.

>>8997813
>>8998244

I disagree, a lot of it is cultural.

Milk consumption, for example. Almost nobody legitimately likes milk in and of itself, we just drink it because calcium and cultural conditioning.

Meat, on the other hand, is a legitimate craving.

There's a reason so many people go dairy free but hardly anyone goes vegetarian.

The BAD news is that milk is far more sustainable than meat, per calorie or even per unit protein.

I predict
Within ten years the global warming theorists will be beaten as war criminals of destroying the earth
Extreme weather occurs when the circulation of the atmosphere is hindered
And it is not due to carbon dioxide but due to active sea phytoplankton activity and sea temperature rise
But it is not global warming

Think about it, that phytoplankton is becoming active means that carbon dioxide is consumed and oxygen is increasing
As the seawater temperature rises, the concentration of dissolved oxygen decreases, and bacteria increase too much,so decomposing the carcass of phytoplankton consumes oxygen,
so it is natural for the concentration of oxygen in the ocean to decline

Some scientifically strong 4chan users need to think about this on the equator and midlatitude areas

Yes, that's right.
When this happens outside the equator,
extreme weather will increase as the air circulation is greatly hindered

>>8996333
>Stop telling people to eat 1 kg of meat per day
I could believe this is an actual US nutrition recommendation

>>8998290
>It does more harm than good.
Bullshit.

>>8998341
thiiiiiiis

Large proliferation of phytoplankton occurs because nutrient salt is continuously supplied to the surface of the ocean by submarine volcanic activity which the solar activity declines and becomes active.

This is exactly what is happening right now.