Request! A Post About The Environment

[crankyoldman]

Requested by first_seventhe because she clearly wants to get me in trouble. Sorry for the spam, I just have nothing to do atm.

So, um, alright. Just to get it out of the way, I don't believe in global warming.



BUT, before anyone starts yelling at me, this doesn't mean you should go around in a gas guzzler and litter and shit. I'll even be so bold as to say I'm probably a hell of a lot more environment conscious than a lot of the annoying yuppie hippies that I usually hear crap from (which doesn't include anyone on my f-list, mind you). I think the main problem with how we treat the environment is how we treat ourselves, that is, single-serving. Our cars, food, lives are very much me-centered. Think about it.

I only dislike global warming theory because most times, there are huge glaring scientific errors of thought that sort of make me stop listening to them. Like, for instance, that when the ice caps melt, the water level will go up. Now, I may suck at thermodynamics and chemistry, but ice has MORE volume than water, which is why when shit freezes in the cracks on streets it sucks when everything thaws, because it makes the cracks bigger. That's just one example. My biologist sister who knows a helluva lot more than I do about such things is even more vocal than I am about it being false.

I do think we are jackasses about waste, though.

I live in a dorm, which means I get to see some of the most lazy wasteful people in action. Come on, you can't walk down the frigging hall to throw a can in the specially marked can recycling bin?! Shit, I've been recycling since I was about, well, five, and we lived in THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE. We didn't have curbside trash pickup, let alone recycling pickup. Sorting through our recycling so that the local recycler place wouldn't reject it was actually a chore in my household. I actually can't throw a can away without feeling... really really bad. It's been conditioned into me. Want to make a bad first impression on me? Throw a can in the trash. I nearly got up in someone's face over them doing this (and in this case THE FUCKING RECYCLE BIN WAS RIGHT NEXT TO THE DAMN TRASHCAN).

It's alright to be worried about our dependency on petroleum, but whatever you do, don't trade your car for a hybrid. Making hybrids involves a caustic process that may very well poison your drinking water. I happen to like not dying from the water, personally. Get a catalytic converter for your lawn mower instead. And if you REALLY want to end the dependency on oil, just stop buying plastic materials.

Really. Most oil is actually used to make plastics, not power cars. I'm not kidding you.

I guess what I'd really like to see is people being less... stupidly hypocritical about the environment. You know? Like when I see an environmental plate on an SUV I sort of wish bad things on them. Or people that get all uppity and shit about other people needing to change their lifestyles. You know what? People won't give a rat's ass unless you give them a cheaper alternative. Welcome to capitalism. I also really am rather annoyed by people that go back completely to nature. That's not helping! That's not progress. Sure, some things we could go back to (like maybe being able to pay attention to one thing at a time) but completely backpedaling is totally not going to do shit for what's going on. If you can take the principles from way back and make something that's new, cheap, effective? THEN you've made a difference.

Hell, I don't even think my finicky recycling and general attempts to get by on public transport and bikes and walking is doing anything more than making myself feel better.

So I guess in short, my thoughts on the environment is that we are idiots about taking care of it because we like everything personalized. But since my faith in humanity is lost when it comes to socialism, we just have to be smarter about the shit that can be thrown away and being aware of where it goes. Also, to stop drinking bottled water and get yourself a filter. REALLY.

...And I'm totally never mentioning this again.

Comments

[katmillia.livejournal.com]

Don't hybrid cars get like 56 mph on highways and stuff? And how about that new car that emits water vapor, I know there has to be a catch somewhere, but it SOUNDS nice, and I hope it's not death as well cause I want one. >.>

[first-seventhe.livejournal.com]

Aha! the car that emits water vapor is a fuel cell car, which uses hydrogen and oxygen as fuels and uses the process of making water as its electricity-creator. Water and unused air are the only byproducts of this.

All my undergraduate research was in fuel cells, plus my first year working at DuPont in Delaware. I am a huge fuel cell expert nerd. I'VE MADE THEM!

The problem with cars is (1) no one wants to drive around with an explosive tank of hydrogen on their backs (y'know, fuck how gas is also an explosive, say hydrogen and people freak the fuck out) and (2) the tehcnology seriously isn't that close to being drive-able. it's 5-10 years away.

Anyway, Cendri, I LOVED this post. And I am really curious about the hybrid car thing, because I was thinking of getting one next year but don't want to if they don't actually help things overall.

LOL EDITED FOR POOR HTML SKILLZ

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

Yeah, so like, I was SUPER EXCITED about hybrids, because my college has a couple hybrid busses and I was like YAY SOCIAL CHANGE.

Until several of my Materials engineering friends made fun of me and told me about the process to make those engines, which is like the use of SUPER CAUSTICS which seep into the soil and kill our drinking water. Which is like, guaranteed death.

So, um, yeah, I really don't endorse them.

AND YES FUEL CELL STUFF I USED TO FOLLOW, DUDE, BECAUSE I WANTED TO WORK FOR NASA UNTIL THEY BROKE MY HEART!

It's funny, because my history prof is a big hippie (he is, but I forgive him because he's not a STUPID hippie) and we're learning about steam engines and shit now and how out of the options, the one that involved you basically sitting on top of an explosion stuck.

And to be fair, while gas is explosive, hydrogen is what used to make up zeppelins and you know how those ended up. At the very least, you can't shake that kind of reputation.

~Cendri

[first-seventhe.livejournal.com]

NO, hydrogen is certainly a very dangerous gas. (I had to take all kinds of safety training there, you know, the kind that TERRIFIES YOU AND MAKES YOU WISH YOU WERE A BASKET WEAVING MAJOR) There's actually a video somewhere on the internet where they explode a gasoline car and then explode a hydrogen car. (It's AWESOME.) It's funny mostly because the gasoline car goes up in flames, whereas the hydrogen car shoots one HUGE flame up in the air but otherwise doesn't do anything. I think it was supposed to prove that hydrogen exploding wasn't all that bad because of how they'd designed the car, but I was too busy watching things explode and going "dude, my job rocks."

[katmillia.livejournal.com]

NO I FOUND THEM!! They are in California at the Hydrogen refueling areas, and they go like 270 miles before they need to be refueled. I KNEW I SAW THEM.

[first-seventhe.livejournal.com]

Yup, California's the only place that has put them into use by building those stations. They did it on purpose as a test run... anywhere else you'd have to have hydrogen dedlivered to your door. Haha.

It will be awesome if they actually can make the cars work, though, because the process for fuel cells is so clean...

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

Well, the fuel cell ITSELF is clean.

But the only way to make hydrogen is by boiling water, yes? What do you use to heat it that doesn't burn?

I mean, I look more on that scale. Sure, the individual person isn't polluting, but most of the manufacture processes cancel out the good it does.

[first-seventhe.livejournal.com]

That's actually the main problem with the fuel cell cars. The car itself may look like a nice neat little environment-saving package, but there is no natural source of hydrogen. We have to make it, and making it is hella expensive (platinum catalyst? whut?) and not very efficient. If the amount of energy used to power one car with hydrogen could actually power three cars with gas, what's the point?

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

The unfortunate truth about those is they are either 1. Hella expensive or 2. the process to make them almost cancels out the good they do.

I'm holding out for a real solution. The water vapor one comes close, hopefully they can figure out a good manufacture process. Prototypes are all well and good, but unless they're commercially viable they're nothing impressive?

~Cendri

[first-seventhe.livejournal.com]

I just want to support the IDEA of fuel-efficient cars, y'know? At this point in my life I'm not worried about cost-efficiency. if I have to spend a little more money to let my dollars make the point that I want a fuel-efficient car that helps the environment, then so be it. A sort of "every little bit counts" thing.

Then again, if it's not really helping the environment I certainly don't want one. I'll have to look into that. I have probably until next year (unless Goldbug dies early D: )

I'll admit, the reason I was interested in this post was because I'm a closet, lazy treehugger myself. "Closet" and "lazy" because I just don't have the activist personality - I don't like PEOPLE enough to be an activist on pretty much anything - and because I know I'm limited and can only do so much. But I like doing small things myself in the hopes that I can balance out the bad things I'm inadvertantly doing to the planet by doing some small good things.

Also because I like hearing nerdy engineers ramble. XD

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

Then again, if it's not really helping the environment I certainly don't want one. I'll have to look into that. I have probably until next year (unless Goldbug dies early D: )

The car itself is good, the manufacture is not and in fact worse than making an internal combustion car. I was reading through my dad's IEEE magazine about that. The only way to make enough hydrogen would mean nuclear reactors to make enough heat to separate it from water. The amount of CO2 released in addition to the caustic chemicals that poison water to make the engine are really not worth it.

It's a lovely concept, but it's not easily implemented on a large scale without making it zero-sum. I think we're stuck in a half-step, with popular science telling us that greenhouse gases are the real problem, when in fact our amount of consumption in general is. It's not bad to cut down trees, as long as you grow enough back. It's not bad to throw things away as long as you can make stuff from them.

Also, YOU may not worry about cost effectiveness, but unless it's something that most people can afford, you are really doing nothing. Even buying it won't do anything because you're just the group that can afford it.

I mean, I may sound rather skeptical, but that's only because even in something as fun as educational gaming, shit does not make a difference unless it is marketable. I mean, your whole "the cost doesn't count" type of thinking misses the point. It's like saying "let's just quandruple the price of cars so that only certain people can afford them".

Europe did that. They don't have mass transport because it's better, they did it because they forced a two class system.

And the US really wouldn't go for that because we are an individualistic culture. It means you get stupidheads and idiots at times, but then it also means there's less of a class system. It's there, because despite the fact that anyone can technically start from nothing few people have the right combination of will and education to do so, but that's crazy sociology theory that I read too much on.

Really, reducing the amount of stuff you throw away and your dependency on plastics (particularly the flimsy kind that can't be recycled) is the best thing you can do for the environment. If you're so guilty about your car, carpool. Or bike. Or walk. But that requires you to lose your independence a little, doesn't it?

~Cendri

[first-seventhe.livejournal.com]

It's a lovely concept, but it's not easily implemented on a large scale without making it zero-sum.

This is the problem with everything, really -- and it's the first thing you learn in thermodynamics: nothing comes for free. There are costs and drawbacks to everything and until either (a) somebody comes up with the next totally awesome magical energy source or (b) saving the planet becomes econnomically feasible*, there's not going to be a good solution.

(I mean, the first thing you learn about in Chem-E is the Carnot Engine. As bad as it may be, there's a reason we're still using that basic system rather than a fuel cell.)

And hey, I've been pushing to carpool with Jeff for a year and a half now. >.>


*Which is the key. I agree with you. Why are so many Americans still fat? Because it's cheap to eat at McDonalds. Economics: the driver.

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

It IS the problem with a lot of things. XD

And dude, my history class goes over a lot of energy related things because my teacher is a hippie.

Suggested readings that may interest you:

Cool It! (a fantastic book from an economist about the global warming idea that does not go the "sky is falling!" route)

This fun article that popped up in my feedreader today. (http://io9.com/368777/how-to-build-an-ecotopian-society)

You also might like No Impact Man (http://noimpactman.typepad.com/). I used to read him, but he goes a little on the anti-progress route, and I want a progressive approach to no impact, not this stupid "let's go back to living in caves!" thing that a lot of environmentalists take.

~Cendri

[first-seventhe.livejournal.com]

And yes. The main roadblock to hydrogen fuel cell cars is, well, the fuel cell. As they're built right now they're very fragile - the membranes can easily break, rip, whatever, just from a hot spot in the process, and then BAM! no car! So they're very much still in the research-stage of industrial processing. They reallly only made the prototypes in California for publicity, and to try and get money. Not saying that they shouldn't have - I think it was a fantastic idea - but it's a little unreal to think we'll have them in the next few years. There's basically no way.

There are other types of fuel cells (solid oxide, methanol, etc) that get less press but are closer to commercialization, I believe. They're probably not as "clean sounding" as the "water vapor car" and so no one knows about them.

This is great. Fuel Cell talk always hits my hot buttons because I worked there for so long. 2 years in academia and 1+ in industry.

*couldn't keep quiet*

[tijuana-pirate.livejournal.com]

Hee hee hee ... I promise not to jump on you, Cendri, but I had to smirk a little because I work in a lab that's made itself famous through climate change research. ;)

I liked your point about how the solutions that people are offering aren't solutions at all because I agree with you 100%. I hate small-scale environmentalism and volunterism (aka, I voluntarily choose to buy more fuel efficient cars, etc.) because it's been pretty much universally shown not to work.

My older brother has a theory about all of this (this is what Arseneau siblings do when they get together; they talk science and politics. XD). Vincent happens to be a history major and he wrote a dissertation on emancipation history in England. He likes to compare it to the climate change problem now. In essence, during the emancipation movement, people were beginning to see slavery as a problem and they wanted to do something but, unfortunately, the entire British imperial system relied on the slave trade. They needed someone to help them redefine their system.

So, that's kind of where I see us as a society right now. We need a roadmap for change. That, unfortunately, is not something that scientists are particularly good at. Even if we say - well, we need to move towards more sustainable technologies, impose carbon taxes etc. etc. ... well, scientist might have a certain amount of respect but I don't think that we have what you could call a social capital. Scientists don't lead revolutions.

The idea of change is already building a social capital though. (The US primaries interest me for this exact reason.) And I think that a real, definitive change will happen soon - within our or our children's generation. It's just a question of stress in the system. We're going to have to adapt to this new environment eventually.

(Besides, peak oil will soon make this entire debate innevitable anyways. :p)

-T. pirate

Re: *couldn't keep quiet*

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

Oh, I know, you're also Canadian and ya'll are a bit more environmentally conscious than us. And I think it's important to follow climate change, I just think that the models still need a lot of work, is all.

I just wish most people in our capitalist system realize that even more so than their vote, their dollar matters. Don't like how a company treats people? Don't buy their stuff! Don't like that they dump in rivers? Don't buy their stuff AND TELL EVERYONE.

Er, but yeah. I'm hardly an expert, I believe more than anything in personal responsibility and education.

~Cendri

Re: *couldn't keep quiet*

[tijuana-pirate.livejournal.com]

Funny that you should mention that canadians consider themselves more environmentally conscience ... because that is sort of true. It's kind of a part of our popular myth (wide open plains, forests, 10 000 lakes, etc).

But, in recent times (past 20 years or so) our government's track record's been slowly declining. Sure, we signed Kyoto but we failed to meet it (and our current government wants to back out of it). Canadians have the second largest per-capita ecological footprint in the world and in a society as highly legislated as canadian society ... our environmental legislation is actually pretty weak. Pathetically so.

But don't ask most canadians about that. Most canadians would tell you quite happily that we take good care of our resources (and probably let some barb slip about the US - no disrespect intended from me!)

Plus, there's more oil in the Alberta tar sands than the fields of Saudi Arabia, fyi.

Truthfully, canadians have a collective myth problem. We like to think that we have a good track record environmentally (especially in comparison to the US!) but that's pretty much a lie. Our only saving grace is that we're a lot smaller that you guys - 35 million canadians is still a pretty small number. We only contribute to about 5% of the world's green house gas emissions.

Personally, I get a private chuckle whenever it comes up in conversion. My country-men don't really think things through. I could rant for a while about problems with the collective identity of most english-canadians.

(And our problematic need to define ourselves as not!american - sad, but true. Every one of our collective myths tends to be constructed as a direct contrast to the stereotypes of american society. Too bad half of them are wrong. :p)

Oh, Canada. You big hypocrite.

-T. pirate

Re: *couldn't keep quiet*

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

Oh good, you realize it's a myth. XD

I generally like to extend an olive branch there.

I also would like to point out, Canada is smaller than the US. I also am mildly annoyed with the whole "at least we're not the US" attitude. Yeah, we screw up, but there's a lot of good done by Americans too. You can't really generalize like that. Really, I think the only difference is we Americans are generally louder.

But I know you're not silly about that. XD Else you would be turning your nose up to me ALL THE TIME.

~Cendri

Re: *couldn't keep quiet*

[tijuana-pirate.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I wonder if it's a bit a product of canadian history. We have a long, unfortunate history of almost being annexed to the United States (war of 1812 anyone? XD). Plus, we're a relatively small middle-power country that depends financially on an economic giant to the south of us. It doesn't help that most of our major media comes from the US. It's almost a bit by default that canadians construct for themselves a not!american view of their identity.

That doesn't make it right though. And it's sort of fundamentally problematic. What's a canadian? not an american! ... so, it's an itallian? XD

Plus, I get a little miffy when canadians go on and on about social/economic/cultural problems in the US (because we get a surprising amount of american news in Canada). Hello, but it's none of our damn business! Stupid people creating false pedestals for themselves.

There's a lot of good done by americans too. Sometimes I want to shake people a little over that. I mean, it wasn't the CANADIAN GOVERNMENT that sent people to the moon. Where the hell would science and medicine be without the US? I mean, seriously people. :p

To be fair to my countrymen, I don't think that canadians think that americans are bad people. Like, they wouldn't walk up to you on the street and be like: pfft, american? You clearly eat children.

It's just that they buy into the stereotypes more than they should. Michael Moore movies do incredibly well in Canada. Why should we care if there's a problem with gun trafficking in the US? (Well, partially because most illegal firearms in Canada funnel in through Philadelphia but that's not the point! XD). I'm sure you see what I mean.

I take the view that people who are jerks happen to be jerks. I've met a lot of canadians who deserve a good kick in the teeth. As much as canadians LOVE to say - oh, we don't do that - we're CANADIAN. We're SOCIALIST. We're MULTICULTURAL -- it's not like the 49th parallel somehow divides us into a shiny utopia of moral rightness. XD

But, I have a pet theory that this is starting to change in Canada. I think that within the next 50 years there's going to be a quiet buyback of canadian identity to something that's more, well, legitimate.

(This only really applies to english canadians though. French canadians already had their cultural revolution. XD)

Oh, I do so babble on.

-T. pirate

[lassarina]

Fascinating. My Libertarian roommate is always sending me things about stuff like this.

I recently downgraded, so to speak, from an SUV to a Corolla and nearly doubled my MPG. I recycle at work and at home because it doesn't take thought nor effort.

Hybrids are actually not all *that* cost-effective because their maintenance costs are often higher than traditional. Also, if you buy a car not explicitly designed to be a hybrid (i.e. Prius) - the "hybridized" forms of Corolla/Camry/etc. are actually much less efficient than a 'real' hybrid because you're forcing a hybrid engine into a not-hybrid frame.

Anyway, interesting post, Cendri!

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

Man, I should have realized the internet would be more forgiving that people I talk to in real life. XD

Which is weird. In a way.

~Cendri

[lassarina]

Not so much the Internet, maybe, but I picture you not having the patience for intolerant closed-minded beanbrains :) It was helped along, in my case, by the fact that M is constantly sending me stories that talk about how global warming is actually either a) not happening according to some measurements; or b) is natural and should be let to run its course.

[venefica-aura.livejournal.com]

Well, my sister is studying biology and basically a paper she wrote to get into her supersmart program at school was refuting global warming.

She suggest the book Cool It! if you're every curious about the economics involved in adjusting for "global warming".

And I have great patience for people until well, they act like idiots. Then I tend to lose my temper a bit. XD I'm working on that.

~Cendri

[astralavator.livejournal.com]

Your oil makes up most plastic reminds me of an anime whose name I can’t even remember which in a lot of ways was what you’d expect from an anime Captain Planet, anyways do to long convoluted reasons anything with petroleum oil in was disintegrating and all the people were surprised at the stuff that disappeared.

I think a lot of our problems have to do with me-centered attitude, not that I’m much better as I’m terrible with waste even though I do know better.