That has already been done but you are not aware of it since you are not a philosopher and you refuse to read any of that quality literature... I referred to your response to my "I beg your pardon? I mean... this is... all over the place... no can make heads or tails of it..." You asked after that: "Wouldn't that be an job for a Philosopher? "
Interesting read. Source : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/organized-crime-deforestation-un-report_n_1930063.html
@redroad Embracing the truth unites, nice to have you back. Yes I know this and we have an establishment in the U.S. But research headquarter is here in Germany. So the demands for safety have to follow EU laws. Licensing then would be U.S. laws, there where it is sold, though. -------------------------------------------------- That so called quality paper about The Zeitgeist Movement introduces today’s problems but does actually not go far enough to hit the core. It discusses symptoms and lives from recriminations. It is food for egos who become alive when found a group to be identified of, to say the sickness is found over there and I am able to recognize and to describe that sickness. It will lead to nothing. The problem is we do not have a look there where it hurts. We are wasting our time with recriminations. And one is a classic victim of it, always forgetting that one is a part of the issue. The core problem is found at each of us and not at a special ‘group’. We have the conflict of the need to consume and the need of to take responsibility of our environment. Each politician, scientist, western philosopher, economy expert has this conflict. The ego works the same way in each of them. When there is the United Nations Climate Change Conference, then it consists of individuals who are suffering from the sickness which is an attribute of each ego. So the conflict acts in each of them. They need to restrict pollution which restricts production, consume and profit. So they often defer the matter to the future. Science and Philosophy is not able to initiate a rethinking process. It can be only done by somebody who has understood who he really is. And it must be a person who is at a position to communicate ‘it’ to the masses. History has had such personalities and there will be new. All what had those people in common had been the ability to put their ego aside and to go beyond its mind. I have said there must be a change in awareness and no new knowledge, no new theories of something. The only today’s power that is able to change awareness is not Philosophy and not science it are tragedies and disasters. And that fact indicates our matureness and where we stand regarding ‘to live conform to our Self’. And what is absolutely inappropriate is the ego as a matter to change the awareness. The only thing that can be achieved is to create hostilities. The ego isn’t interested in a solution of the problem, because it is the cause of the conflict and to resolve it would mean to deprive his existence. We have the ability to split an atom. We know the actions of a A-bomb. How long took it until those egos saw a sense, that it is totally sick? And the A-bomb danger is still a matter. Then we said we can use it in nuclear plants. We fooled our self and said that energy is safe. We have noticed a A-bomb is harmful, but a nuclear plant is safe. The physical process is the same though, to split an atom. Then fukushima came. Yes, catastrophes are our teachers, but neither scientists nor Philosophers. Sad. The awareness of the German people, to show to be involved, to put the ego aside, to raise the pressure on politics had been the reason to finally step out of that technology. But who has followed? Nobody else. There are even people who laughed about that decision saying the Germans will not manage to step out. This is sick. Everybody should be aware of to have responsibilities the neighbors also, that this project must not fail. It is a milestone of a new awareness and can only fail when the power of the old ego acts again. So the core problem is always a ego problem. We need to be aware of how the ego works, how he protects its existence. To achieve that we need to create a new awareness. We can do that when we withdraw awareness from the ego-mind and focus that on our Self, which means on the present. We finally need to understand that we can only act in the present. The Philosophy that we are the future is fuss! “We are aware of the problem and we are intelligent. We are able to develop a solution of climate change in the future. We will work out a concept for a better future of humankind.” Say this every day and you will get nothing will happen, because we cannot act in the future. We can only act now. And it is you, each of us who has to act, not ‘the others’. When having a empty plastic bottle of water and I have the idea to throw it away, no matter where I am at present it is me presently who makes that decision. Ego based, or with a new awareness. But it never happens in the future, it happens at that moment when I have the chance of a change. And that will be always and only at present. So we can wait now until our one and only teacher: The catastrophes will teach us again or to have focus on a new awareness now. The ego needs to consume, because deep in us there is the feeling of incompleteness. We are hunting for recognition. Hence the ego lives with fear all the time not to get it. The ego constantly needs self-affirmation to survive. And so the ego creates the illusion that in the future there will be a solution. So we wait. The ego has those attributes because it is a total miss-identification with something that is not our real Self. The ego is an idea of what we are, but not that what we really are. The ego constantly denies the present. A ego related person is not able to live presently. But we can only live in present. To respect the present would mean to kill the ego. To be satisfied with that what is now, would kill the ego. But there is nothing else. There is only NOW. The ego-mind cannot get that illusion of the future, because it would mean his death. 'I want' is his name and that implies a future by denying the present. To see the future to be a reality makes the ego to deny the present (the true reality). I feel bad, but in future there will be a solution, I feel incomplete but in the future I will get what it's missing... There is no future, there is ever now. The future is an illusion of the mind. The present cannot 'get' any thing. It is as it is. There is no place for an ego. The step into a new awareness is to accept the presence and to accept the fact that we can only live now. When living this truth other truths will unveil. Truths such as that my inner Self is not different than ‘the nature’ outside. So I hurt myself when I pollute the nature. There is no real difference. Until this awareness isn’t there scientists and politicians and Philosopher will only write quality papers. Scientists will collect and analyze data, Philosophers will write about new mechanisms in science and economy and phenomena to explain them. But a change will not happen. Only goal of those are to convince others to be right and that is a pure ego reaction. The separation of the ego and nature with all their problems will persist. Each science and Philosophy has their jobs. But that what is needed to get a new awareness is not their job. It is the job of each of us to live conform to our Self, to devote to our self and the feeling of incompleteness will vanish. The ‘success’ of a society and culture is always dependant on the amount of self-understanding. And no science and no Philosophy was ever able to describe it. No theory ever will, the mind is not able to comprehend. The mind cannot comprehend what is at present and an idea of the present is always past. And hence there will be ever special persons who have this self-understanding in them. Those will change the world. A special subject in science or Philosophy never will. The consciousness of the people had ever created that change, not ‘the’ scientists, not ‘the’ philosophers. But that’s only the beginning, the beginning of a new consciousness…each of us is affected, be a part of it.
Uh, uh, so much written and based on nothing, no real analysis, no showing one understands any of those notions, nada... The truth be told, Yen, it seems to me this is your "heavily prejudiced impression from a feeling the paper left on you"... But you are not in the position to even start evaluating that paper in any way, let alone critically. First, you need to fully understand it... And you didn't show even that, I am sorry to say... But it's good that you are thinking about it... Maybe in a century... errmmm... or three... at this tempo... we'll be reading the "Collected works of one Yen-Master"...
@yen. yes. it is nice to have redroad back. yes, we have got a choice as individuals in the here and now about pollution. and yes we are doing it, not someone else..all very true.. but as a collectivity, as a political entity, we have not seen the penny drop.. not in germany, not in europe, not in the us, and most certainly not in the new economies.. [ just look at the multi-million dollars conferences, that achieve noting..] most usefull forrests in brazil just get eleminated for financial gain..then there are the islands of indonesia and the phillipines..no better.. i should hate to start a fire here, and knowing redroad, i know there may be a risk of that, but really, i believe that nuclear energy is a much better option than messing around with windmills and solar panels that will just not foot the energybill and will cost like hell.. they got a marketing lobby that is at least as crazy as the nuclear boys or the oil boys, btw.. they are turning themselves into a major industry. okay, we had two major disasters, Tsjernobyl, Fukushima, and some smaller mishaps.[ lots of them, admittedly..] but we also had disasters with oil, all over the the place, and oil started more wars than i would care to shake a stick at; in fact finding oil outside europe or the us triggers war almost automatically.. and there is nothing worse than war, imho.. i am not so sure if all this green energy stuff is going to help anyone, sorry..it is just going to cost..
Well, we could easily supply all our energy needs from the Sun - IF we knew how to transfer/transport or store the energy harnessed EFFICIENTLY, say, in Sahara or some such similar place... A fraction of Sahara's surface has to be utilised but at the moment, it seems we do not have the know how... If we do, somebody is bloody sitting on it... I want really good electric cars! And so forth! http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/23/solarpower.windpower http://www.treehugger.com/renewable...wer-in-the-sahara-project-moving-forward.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertec http://thinkafricapress.com/environment/sun-rush-sahara http://www.greenprophet.com/2010/11/solar-energy-from-sahara-desert-could-power-europe/ http://cleantechnica.com/2011/12/14...ara-desert-could-power-the-world-but-will-it/ Having in mind all manner of problems with the ageing nuclear power plants in France and elsewhere is EU - not a minute too soon...
Please spare myself of your smugly manner which ever comes to light when replying to my posts. Contrary to you I don't need academic papers and analysis to know that our awareness must change. You are one of those studying the phenomena and their coherences. And always denying competence of somebody who just says what he thinks from practical experiences. My posts are actually shorter than yours, I don't link to other's work. May I suggest to you: Go and start finally to work practically, then you will get how valuable your way of thinking is. And how your actions will improve our society. Now you are just one who 'talks' in platitudes everyday sitting in front of a computer. Waiting for the future? I have not referred to special contents of the paper, so how can you know I did not understand? I've said that paper goes IMO not far enough since it does not address one's ego generally. Everybody of us needs to get a change in awareness and another relation to nature, so that we can respect it. Our decisions then later no matter what profession we all have will be influcenced by this new awareness so we can act there where we are pros always with this new awareness. A friend of mine (no he is not a Philosopher sitting at home), he is customs officer. His wife comes from a small island in Indonesia. When it started to get to know each other 2 cultures met. The touch with the nature and high tech. My friends awareness and idea of nature changed through the years. And it took time until he got accepted by the village council.... But finally years later when the tourism started there he introduced a recycling system for plastics and glas. He did that together with the village council. That is exemplary! Did he need academic 'quality' papers and theoretic fuss? Could he achieve that sitting at home full of pride of a study? No. He made the first own step. A tiny step compared to the world, but he did it while others are busy with theories. All one needs is a new awareness. Each of us needs to make the effort, we cannot treat the nature as we are doing now. The nature is not separated from 'us'. I have posted that already: I am the sun and the sun is me. To most of us it is strange and mad when saying that. But most are trying to get that with the mind. It is the ego-mind that separates us from the nature. In reality there is no difference. As long as one does not get that, no theory will change our behavior. We are our nature and the nature is us. Actually nobody needs a study to experience that truth.
Nuclear energy cannot be 'right'. It is a energy that leaves back waste which will be harmful thousands of years. When one has got that there is no difference to us and the nature, how it can be right then to make areas of it uninhabitable? How can you speak of costs, not able to calculate the costs of nuclear waste? Those who had calculated the costs of nuclear energy have fooled all of us saying it is cheap and safe! They can never since one has to store the waste thousands of years! It needs to be stored at a place at a safe place which must be thousands of years safe! Can one bequeath that waste from generation to generation without to lose responsibility? Is that 'healthy'? You say green energy is going to cost. What is one losing? Money? Exactly this (money) thinking delays everything and is not different to those who are polluting the nature. But you are right nodnar the matter is complex. Hence I address always one's ego generally and do not work out special theories...to compare disasters with disasters to justify to continue a kind of technology is more than questionable.... When we change awareness then it will be no effort to stop pollution / exploitation, it will be our most natural thing to act in the name of nature...just like to say hello to a foreigner...
@Yen It is good to be back .. Thanks .. Your post on the ego is so true and I agree wholeheartedly .. The torment the ego inflicts on our personal lives as well as our extended self (nature) is hard to digest some days and like you said it can only be addressed in the now. This truth goes a long way in healing the chaos and drama left in the wake of the ego's daily rantings ..
Ehhhhh... The other day my wife and I took our son to a park. I was not in the best of health, so my wife went running after him, while I was a supporting actor, this time. Otherwise I would ran with him, go up and down the structures on playgrounds, we'd kick the ball etc. So, as they went around the park, I saw a basketball flying above a tree and I went to investigate. I love b-ball and I used to play it a lot, as a young man. Nowadays, I am a basketball coach and I love teaching, when I have a chance. So, I see - as it turned out - a father (52) and son (17) from my neck of the woods, who heard me, a little later, talk to my boy in Serbo-Croat. They smiled and we introduced each other. After a couple of games I saw enough to be confident I can help his boy, since he didn't have the privilege of going through an ex-YU school of basketball, so I offered to help out. "Please, do!" they both said, passing the ball to me. After about half an hour his father said "Tell me son, in these three years that you have been coached in this country (Luxembourg), have you learned even 10% of what you heard today?" The young man shook his head and said, "When we get to a training, when it comes to shooting (which I tutored him in, that day), the coach gives us the balls and says "Shoot!" And that's the end of that!" Both of them were very grateful and full of praise for my effort. They couldn't thank me enough for wanting to go through the bother, even though I was of poor health (after the 1/2 hour session I was breathing heavily, so it was visible that it was quite an effort for me, which I could've done without...) Now, with that attitude I can help people. And gladly so! I enjoy doing that. I love giving! Similar to developers on this forum. And I respect that! And I thank them at every turn! However, I do open my mind to learning from those who know more in an area than me. Common sense. But you, Yen, apparently, regardless of the fact you stated how you would love to debate things with a Philosopher - I can not teach you anything at all, as it seems to me now... You have your mind firmly shut. So, I think I am not the smug one here. I could see, after a couple of pages of debates in various thread on this forum, just like I could see in that park, that I have plenty to teach you, to help you with, when it comes to Philosophy and thinking carefully, methodically, critically. And yet, despite your statements of wanting it, you show no signs of an open mind, of somebody who wants to learn a new thing. In psychology, we call it "negative transfer", when previously learnt and solidified "knowledge/skills" are impeding the process of learning a new skill/fact/method of thinking etc. I don't try to invent everything from scratch, from my own head. I don't think this is productive. And frankly, when people ignore the work of others - that, to me, is a real smugness... You are right, also, when it comes to coherence - it is something I do take seriously. And therefore, I do think about these things carefully... Now we are talking real smugness, here... This is the old clobbering tool: "theory and practice, one has nothing to do with the other" and so on. Mind, not in Science. Science is exactly like that - it all has to be verifiable and so on. But not so in Humanities, allegedly... There, everything is somehow disconnected, apparently. But, curiously enough, those huge egos claiming such nonsense do not question their understanding of both theory and practice and how the two might be related and interact... Which is the real smugness, as far as I am concerned, because there is another possibility in all this. Namely, that the "interpreter" does not properly understand either of the two or how they may be related. In fact, a theory which does not "calculate in" ways of achieving its goals is a poor theory. As for how my actions may already have improved my society - well... Serious smugness and typically ignoring the facts, since I told you I am preparing for some EU competition, now that my son is in full time kindergarten system and so forth. More than that, I have put 'my' "theory" to the test. Democracy prevailed against Stalinism in my ex-country, so you see, I know what I am talking about. Moreover, I have put at least my liberty on the line, in helping bring democracy to the place that never had it before, in any serious manner (by, for instance, defending the rights of my political enemies to contest the powers that be at the time - for power). Now, they are learning, in those countries, although at the moment, they are seriously behind the Western EU countries, which are already trying to bring the best of democracy to life for more than two centuries, in some places... I take pride in that part of "putting theory in practice"... You do not have a monopoly on "living your theory", Yen. Let go of the huge ego-trip here. So, serious smugness, indeed. On your part. Be fair, Yen: can this be done in Chemistry? Can somebody come in and say anything they wish/feel and think s/he must be taken seriously and literally, without any respect and/or real knowledge/understanding of the "state of the art" in Chemistry, while 'criticising' it as much as possible? I don't think so. In the same vane, I am telling you, in a matter of fact fashion, without any emotion whatsoever, that you do not understand that paper, that you are missing its point. I am not surprised, since I have seen how your "ego-mantra" works. But I repeat: ego and related notions have been worked on for quite a bit of time, in Philosophy, Psychology, Sociology and so on. You would be wise to inform yourself before you are "seriously critical" and even utterly dismissive of "Western" achievements in this regard. I would direct you to Habermas, before all else, with his inter-subjectivity - there you will see, if you apply yourself a bit, just how little you know on the topic. Embrace learning and open-mindedness, Yen! And this is from the heart! Already being done, for quite some time, at the highest level - but since you do not know about it, you keep inventing hot water... with not so great results, I'm afraid... My wife is from Brazil. A few of my previous partners were from all over the globe: Pakistan, UK, Germany, Israel, Jamaica, Croatia, Serbia, Macedonia and whatnot. I do know a few things about cultural differences and awareness of this sort, thanx... And recycling is a new thing, yes - but done all over the world. So not sure I understand your point, sorry... Serious smugness and resentment... Really disrespectful! Moreover, to start this type of thinking one had to understand Earth as a finite resource and so forth, for which one had to have serious education, plenty of info and therefore many resources at his/her disposal. Various theories included. It is being done already, the idea is amongst us for a while now. Started in the West, since it was the West that started the serious production fuelled by consumption and manipulation of desire, that is at the basis of it all - a novel thing, one of the bad strands of Modernity. But as I said before (and you keep ignoring it, as it doesn't fit your narrative/"ego mantra"), just A strand. Not the only strand. There are others, also in Modernity... Serious smugness and disrespect towards those that do the job at the highest level and then try to implement such practices, in law and in everyday lives of people, sometimes on the level of whole states or even wider. Why do you need to be so dismissive? Where does that come from? Aha, so one has to think about it ("awareness") and have a bit of a "theory". It has to start from somewhere "inside", from a spirit. And then it is being done, tried and tested etc. Hmmm... Jumping into your own stomach, eh? Oh, well.. And what is this "ego-mind" you keep mentioning but never defining? More than that: what are you fighting here? Who are you fighting here? Me? Oh, no. I know this subject in some depth, as I have worked on it for quite some time, aided by some really good, wise heads. Some of it I have elaborated on this forum, several times. You will not see me stating anything essentially different - in terms of "being exploitative to the bitter end, regardless of the consequences", if this is what you are saying. Many others in this thread, they all share the view, broadly speaking. In reality, many people, especially when driven by Capitalism, but not exclusively so (see Easter Islands, for instance or species we made extinct way before Capitalism), separate themselves from the Nature in them and around them, quite forcefully and destroy - just one example - huge chunks of (Amazon) forests and people and anything who dare stand in their way ("in the way of progress", they say - but we all know material interest when we see one, do we not?). To "get that" means to "understand it", does it not? So, basically, one must interpret all these phenomena, i.e. have a good, quality understanding of what is going on before acting on it properly. In effect, a "little theory", isn't it? Ergo, a "theory" - and here is difference between you and me on the topic - you would say "will" and I would say "may" change our behaviour. Careful! The way we are at the moment, broadly speaking, we (talking "large numbers" now) may "feel" differently - at least initially - about consuming less, being frugal, changing our wasteful ways and whatnot. But we have higher capacities to over-ride such "socially learnt" "old" ways of ours... Do we not? Reason! Actually, all you have said is a "theory". Your understanding of the problem. Your interpretation of many phenomena, not just one. Lots of presumptions in all this. Actually, you did hear it all before you wrote any of this above, but you do not give any credit to the theory you already learnt from others. You are conveniently forgetting it and not giving them any credit, to all those who did it before you. Moreover, "truth" is a massive word. Massively important. And it must be carefully thought through. Establishing/understanding the "Truth", in a complex society, is a complex task which must be taken seriously. And this is not a simple, easy task, by any stretch of imagination. Now, I know that almost everybody can understand these things. But not everybody gets good quality education. Just look at Anglo-Saxon world, for instance. US is at the bottom of most tables, when it comes to public education, that part of the system which is directed at the "great unwashed". And as long as it is like that, the desires of the "great unwashed" will be easier to manipulate and manufacture... A complex phenomenon at the heart of today's society, based in Capitalism. One of the ways out of this lies in a little episode I will describe now. In former Yugoslavia, what is today Slovenia, there was a moped factory. Those 50cc mopeds were running and running and running... for ever... The factory nearly collapsed. They invited Western experts to help them out. The "lesson" was: build them weaker, poorer, much less durable, so people need more parts and new mopeds. You will have more jobs, not less. And there go our resources... Also, in the fact that Capitalism, as it is today, mostly Neo-Liberal, neo-Conservative driven, needs to expand at (at least) 3% annually. Anybody has any suggestions why? Because this is an essential question. It requires serious thinking and a very serious critical theory, in order to overcome this beast that is consuming the planet, ever hungrier... No way out, without some serious thinking, a serious theory, which will include so many issues in it, making it possible to overcome the present processes of decay. As somebody said: we have had a party and now somebody should pay the bill and clean up... The following generations, my son among them, will bare the consequences of our (non-)actions, theoretical as well!
Ohh, lol. Why is it always that hard to discuss with you? Have you ever asked yourself why it is ever you and only you who anatomises my posts? And why do you ask for definitions when you later anatomise it again? To get that does mean to experience that. Do you experience a difference between you and the nature or not? And if yes, evaluate that.... It is no theory it is a truth that cannot be understood my the mind. We have got the ability to recognize us as a individual in a mirror, we have a 'higher' consciousness than animals, but we are in a 'crisis'. Our mind has taken control of us. I have tried to explain that many times but you don't want to get it. The ability to have a imagination of ourself has become a sickness. Consciousness is made to recognize itself, but we are stuck in this ego. This characterizes our present age. You don't now the state when being totally aware of the present and hence we have problems here...it is actually simple, the truth is in itself self-revealing and beyond any theory. But a person who needs to define even love will never get that. " So, we "must" learn how to love, in a serious, "adult" manner, as it were... Just consider the many aspects of "love" and you will see what I mean when I say that we have to learn about it, please..." You never had been beyond your mind. You cannot understand that the truth is fully present in each of us. And when this truth shines through the results can never be wrong. This never fits to any theory, I am sorry.... The mind cannot accept what I am talking of.....people laugh about. All great scientists have their moments of access to treasures from that present silence and awareness beyond mind, between 2 thoughts.......later the mind 'uses' them and declares to be the author of it..... In short: We need to come back to our Self, there is the truth 'already'. This sounds odd, but the one who is 'there' where it IS will understand it. There is a way to be conform to that what we are, we just need to live that way and we cannot be wrong. That knowledge doesn't need a study. Or guess what: One knows already everything one ever could! What theory is that? No theory, it IS. When this truth unveils there will be no more place for any doubt. But this is esoteric BS to most of us. Imagine we all would have the strong feeling and knowledge that there is no difference of the nature and our 'I' idea.....means if you hurt the nature you will feel that pain at once..would then anybody have the intention to pollute it? And now imagine to me 'Yen' it is the truth.....do not ask why I cannot answer that question....you have to figure your own answer...
Oh, boy, I really do hate that LOL and so I never use it but this time I'll make an exception... LOOOL!!! That's why...
At least some of our ideas matches. In every day's actions I try to be aware of what I have got and that is not different to you. All I want to make clear is that we should handle our goods with care. The love to our nature is the love to our self. To have this awareness all the time is what I meant goes beyond the mind....to be aware of when handling those goods. And I mean this needs no study, it is quite natural, at least it should be.
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/liquid-air-could-fuel-future-035017019.html Hmmm... but something/somebody has to make all that air, to be liquefied and used in enormous quantities... And if I remember correctly, when the aeroplane era started, higher altitudes were achievable without oxygen masks, so go figure...
The main issue at energy related matters is that we have missed to develop technologies to accumulate / store electric energy. The only use I see here (liquid air) is to use it as a storage technology, to save surpluses of energy when natural conditions (sun, wind) are producing more energy than can be fed into the power grid. To use it to drive a motor in unique vehicles is useless, to spread and handle liquid air is lossy and there is no infrastructure while we have power grids already. The same reason here why I think liquid hydrogen (fuel cells) will be also no alternative. I think we still can have combustion engines, but the fuel has to come from 100% renewable raw materials and the electric energy either from natural powers or also from combustion engines using renewable raw materials. Your comments I don't get though. What has oxygen from oxygen masks in aircrafts to do with that? The earth has enough air to liquify and will get it back later, lol, and the oxygen from the masks comes from chemical processes initiated in an emergency case and not from liquid air. Aircrafts fly in around 10 kilometers height where there is almost no air and a low preasure outside. Cabin preasure is there to have the same as at sea level. And oxygen masks are made to bridgeover the loss of cabin preasure in an emerceny case until the pilot has reached a height where there is enough oxygen and preasure outside. No liquid air at all.
There are engine that use the ZERO-point energy, but it's not released to the public. Did you know about Keshe Foundation? http://www.keshefoundation.org/en/ No government wants to participate...I wonder why?
Oh, Christ, Socrate... Yen, when the era of aviation started, allegedly higher altitudes were achievable then, than today, with the same type of early open-cabin aircraft... I am not claiming this - just reporting what I read... a while back! It may have had something to do with the evidence by mountaineers, also but... It needs checking out... I really do not know how much of this may or may not be true... It might be nothing at all but...
I am still waiting for someone to tell me how CO2 is a pollutant ? 78% of air is Nitrogen while 0.04% is CO2 ! Where is the proof that CO2 is directly related to atmospheric temperature increase ? IMHO there is no single fuel of the future, countries with lots of sun exposure can utilize solar power, ones that have access to geothermal can use that, many can use wind and the colder countries can utilize hydrogen and nitrogen. If cold fusion were possible it would solve a lot of energy problems right now.
The physical attribute that is responsible for it is the ability to absorb infra red radiation (up going thermal radiation). Well we have 78% N2 and 21% O2, 1% Ar, 0.038% C02 and some minor gases. Nitrogen and Oxygen (99%) of the gases are transparent to infra red radiation. (No absorption). OK, we have down going solar radiation and up going thermal radiation at our earth. And then we have different gasses which are able to absorb different wavelength of electromagnetic radiation. Nitrogen and Oxygen (99%) of the gases are transparent to infra red radiation. (No absorption). Water vapour is actually the most effective heat-trapping gas, followed by CO2 Have a look at this: The earth reflects radiation between 3-100µm (blue curve). Primarily water vapour is responsible for that specific narrow range (specific 8-17 µm). CO2 is second. It narrows the range primarily at 13-17 µm (maximum absorption is 15µm). Only at a very narrow range (8-13µm) is a practically unhindered emission possible (blue area below the curve). This range is used by IR weather satellites to look through to lower cloud ceiling and earth surface. So the effect of CO2 is an additional effect to the water vapour reducing areas of unhindered up going thermal radiation. The energy will be left in the atmosphere which causes a heating of it. So pollutants are called components (gases) which are able to absorb thermal up going radiation additionally (at additional ranges).