Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Global warming or not?
Reguardless of your politics. If you are a libreal or conservative. Believe in global warming or not. Wouldn't we be better off if we quit putting extreme amount of carbons in our atmosphere.
As a nation wouldn't we be stonger if we were energy independent. By using renewable energy such as wind and solar for our homes and bio fuels for our cars we would not have to be concerned everytime something happens outside our borders on how it will affect us at the pumps and heating our home. We have the technoligy and the resources to be totally energy independent in the next 10 years. Not only would we be a stronger nattion we would be protecting our enviroment.
Just for once I would like for us to take the politics out of this and really talk about how we can be become less dependent on foreign oil and enviromentally friendly.
13 Answers
- OrionLv 51 decade agoFavorite Answer
Hot Diggity!
Spot-on!!
Though alternative fuels/energy sources have their own costs involved in producing and distributing the energy, I'm ALL for energy independance (as much as possible) for the US and getting us as weaned off of Middle-Eastern Oil as we can.
More new Nukes would be good. More Solar, more Wind, and research more alternatives! Multi-Fuel engines are great...
Remember though - a LOT of high-tech non-petroleum based solutions have a HUGE environmental cost. High-Tech batteries are incredibly toxic as are their manufacturing processes, wind-farms have a big cost in dead wildlife and altering the environment down-wind as well as being difficult to forecast and plan for (resulting in a lot of waste), Solar is incredibly inefficient, toxic, and fragile as well as altering the energy absorption and weather patterns (if used in a large area) and so on...
Doesn't mean we shouldn't be using them - and researching more effective means!
Forget the Global Warming nonsense. Common Sense is a good thing and it can be done in a businesslike fashion that will result in more profits for our businesses, not less. THAT is how you sell Environmentalism. Pity I couldn't get anyone in the Green Party to listen - which is why, after 11 years, I left.
Orion
- 1 decade ago
Unfortunately, it is not the politics that prevent us from being a peaceful, progressive and civilized race of human beings because of the diseases of Capitalism, Hypocracy, Greed, and the idea that why would I want to work for anything that I can legally supress to claim more money for what I have to sell. I believe that global warming and cooling are the process of the natural evolution of the planet that peole will devise something to make a killing on in the name of saving the world. Natural disaster is a planetary hazard and completely out of the control of mankind, thus if I cannot control it I will make money on it. Theories that are adopted as fact of anykind is accepted as fact in light of no other explanation that makes more sense or has more proof. We have had the possibility of solar power since the 60's but the power of money for the continue use of available sources is dictated as necessary like electricity, gas, and the like if given the option of cheap equally as effective or more and widely available to everyone would kill those that control the cost of the source they own. If electric cars and efficient solar power took the place of the utilities you buy at an enourmous charge were availabel to you for pennies and no controlled the dispensing of such power what would happen to your company? Exactly, they cannot control the sunlight but can control the technology that would harness the use of free energy. Did you get the brochure that told you we would release that technology when circumstances force us to change sources or we control the technology ensuring the survival of our billions of dollars. Its not politics that control it, its the capitalism that drives the politicians to enact laws and legislation to make sure that the rich do not lose any major foothold or money in the economy. The rich get richer and the poor continue to purchase what they sell for lack of options.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Yes, we need to be energy independent! Whatever that takes, it should be a top-tier national issue!!
All the other debates raging in "Politics" section (well, most) all find their foundation in America's dependence on foreign energy sources.
WE MUST BECOME ENERGY INDEPENDENT. If not, my kids will be fighting in wars over the last of the worlds oil, one day. Or their kids will.
No one need die, it's a matter of national priorities.
Chi, you're awsome on this issue! We DO agree on at least one thing!
Source(s): A conservative Independent (who thinks this is Bush's WORST area!) - 1 decade ago
I totally agree with you. I am a disbeliever in the whole global warming thing, however, we should stop being so relied on foreign oil. Look up on Tesla Motors, they developed an extremely nice electric car. It is really sporty, this could be a huge step for people to start switching, since all the electric and hybrid cars look so damn lame. Solar power and wind power is already used, but we need to think of ways to help people get them. Getting those forms of energy started aren't exactly cheap. Totally agree with you, I just think getting it done through preaching about Global Warming is bullcrap.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
One word: Economics.
If it's going to cost money, we won't do it. It's never about doing the right thing, you just hope that the invisible hand moves us to a better future. Look at the consumption of oil right now, it is fueling economies around the world trying to achieve prosperity. The US wouldn't sign the Kyoto treaty because it would hurt OUR citizens and look around, who isn't complaining about soaring gas prices.
Jeffrey Sachs said that we have the technology and resources to end poverty by 2025, and even despite the evidence he provided, we still haven't made a good enough movement to this goal.
- Chi GuyLv 51 decade ago
Australia is phasing out incandescent light bulbs throughout the entire country (going to the neon energy savers). This simple change alone reduces hundreds of tons of emissions per year. My house is virtually incandescent free (low electric bill).
Spain is taking an entire island to 100% wind and hydro energy.
Brazil is 100% ethanol for vehicles.
Holland or Sweden has made or is making the first fully fuel-cell highway. Fuel-cell recharging stations will be placed along the highway. They turn filtered water into hydrogen to recharge the cells. Its a simple process and is done automatically while you wait.
I'd like to see tax incentives or low interest federal backed loans for residential solar paneling.
- archangel72901Lv 41 decade ago
Not to panic you, but 3 volcanic eruptions release more carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide than mankind has released in it's entire existence. Shouldn't we start by plugging the volcanoes?
- 1 decade ago
Fuel cell technology! What is the deal, where is it?
I am not in scare mode about global warming but I am sick of paying SOOOO much for gas~!
- Kye HLv 41 decade ago
Since Mount St. Helen put more pollutants in the air in one eruption than man has in all the time we have been on Earth in total, what does the little bit we are able to matter at all? Volcanoes are erupting all the time.
- TELv 51 decade ago
What we need to do is, every US citizen needs to become rich so we may buy carbon credits to ease the guilt of our carbon foot print, then we can all feel less guilty like Al Gore. He is the true hero, we need to listen to him because he can teach us how the wealthy can preach to others and not practice what they preach.