Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.

On 10/31/24 11:58, Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 10/31/2024 11:06 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
...

    yes and it has a short half life in the atmosphere but we
humans tilted the balance with our COO emissions. All for the sake
of faster and easier.
>
    bliss

>
No, for the sake of civilization.

>
Somehow, I never thought of (say) Assyria or Classical Greece as
making massive CO2 emissions.
>
Yet both were civilizations.

 Our present civilization is built on cheap energy.  Getting rid of fossil fuels today would cause a huge population crash across the planet.  Maybe a 10X crash.  The primary cause of the crash would be the lack of tractors and harvesters.  The secondary cause of the crash would be fertilizers.
 Lynn
 

Global warming is going to result in many deaths because
fertile lands are already being flooded, See Bangladesh.
Tractors can be run on big batteries just like cars and a portion
of the farmer's acres can be turned to power generation.
Everyone on the planet now and in the future is doomed to
death because that is the payment for life. We all die sooner
or later and everyone puts it off as long as possible,
if sane and not living in constant pain.
But by use of fossil fuels we have ensured the death
of nations all over the planet.
Now cities like San Francisco imagine that they can
in the future ameliorate the effects of rising waters by
building sea wall but these will not work when the water from
the SF Bay is high enough to intrude into the Central Valley.
The food supply will begin to suffer as the salt water intrudes.
Of course if we build a high dam at the Carquinez Strait we
might get a very contaminated fresh water lake. It would take
a long time to get the water cleaned up and might be simply
impossible.
bliss