I read the news. I comment the news. I criticize the news. That's me, like it or not.
In recent news there has been raised an issue about humans' growing need of water in near future. At the same time the ice-bergs keep melting away, which brings extra water. Where is the problem? Today I read that the water level on earth is going to be higher than previously expected. Need of more water in the future again to solve this problem. Why not bring the extra water into Sahara and make it fertile again? Or something just as unexpected.
Scientists are trying to combine hydrogen (2 H2) and oxygen (O2) not just to make water (2 H2O) but in order to get huge amount of energy from nuclear fusion. That should not affect the balance of water still, but the outcome would be more environmentally friendly than radioactive waste. I may calculate here wrong because I wasn't brilliant e.g. in chemistry at school, but instead of using oxygen we could use the ozone (O3). It would require 3 hydrogen molecules, but who cares, right? The ozone layer wouldn't grow anymore and everyone would be happy.
Yesterday there was a piece of news on TV which I had heard already. Having a dog costs environmentally double as a sport utility vehicle (chemically marked as SUV). Ain't that something? It isn't bad enough that people who claim to love animals keep them imprisoned - they also contaminate our future. I don't know who has sponsored that news, maybe the Hummer manufacturers or such, but it leaves us with a wider perspective anyway.
All in all, it seems that we're still dumb enough not to truly exploit the energy our Sun is dealing us every moment. Why to build even wind mills to spoil the views? Ok, the Sun will stop shining one day but it's a millions of years away still. Or hundreds at least. We could save some of it for the future needs already, if we couldn't use all of it right now. Why are we so petty that we fight for a piece of the action while the whole action is endangered?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Needless to point out that it's not the dog, it's the stupid owner of the dog that consumes too much. Surely SUV takes you to the nature and back and even without even using (too much) your legs or other body. But why bother, one can skip them both, sit still at home and watch the sitcoms ;)
ReplyDeleteAnd are the manufacturing costs of car taken under consideration here? Dogs breed for free, if you let them, no costs, nothing ;)
Yes, well, SUV doesn't destroy nature when it's nicely parked and not in use. Agreed, this doesn't sound like a fair fight, and like I wrote there, this study may not be well-balanced and neutral. But then again, years ago dogs were fed with all kind of food left-overs; nowadays they are mostly denied. Instead they get processed food. Well, signs of the times I guess.
ReplyDelete