22 August 2008

cfc and coal environmentalism

"coal are you kidding, how many more holes do you want in the ozone layer come on we have so many other technologies that we can employ that don't require us to destroy the earth. It should be clear to all by now that fossil fuels are an archaic means of providing energy...lets unstick ourselves from the past and move forward for a change."

I'm pretty sure that it was CFCs and not coal that create problems for ozone and were subsequently banned or at least restricted.

Coal does other things instead.
1) Generates electricity/power inefficiently by burning it.
2) Which then creates air particulates which should either be collected/recycled or else expelled to create pollution (as in the pretty pictures from Beijing or London mid 19th century).
3) That pollution and air quality has several effects which may or may not be playing off one another. For example, the dark particle matter could be refracting solar energy by creating water vapor (cloud cover) as in the case of a volcanic eruption, but not on anything like the same scale. Or the carbon emissions could be trapping solar energy. Neither is a potentially wise course.

If coal can be replaced we could be doing so. The stumbling block as I see it has been getting the infrastructure in place to do it and resolving some issues with energy transfer or storage (such as by creating hydrogen). If it can be cleaned up in the meantime, we should do that as well.

No comments: