I thought this would be interesting for all you environmentalists out there. In a recent discovery, scientists in a small British company have discovered a way to make gasoline out of air and water. The process is long and at the moment it doesn't pump out enough gas for all of use to use at once; 1.3 gallons of gasoline refined over a 3 month period.(1) but that will change they believe when more research is put into this. There isn't much of estimated costs for this project but it seems to be a turning point for moving it forward on a large scale with proof that they have built the thing together and shown that it works. (2) Read more about it in the links below.
Also, what are your thoughts on this "guilt free" gasoline?
Wait. Why is this better? Firstly, we need both air and water more than we need gasoline, in theory.
Secondly, not only is this solution using up other important elements of the Earth, but it will also do... what for the burning of the oil? "guilt-free"? It'll burn the same way, as I see it, and the emission of the gas is a greater issue than the mining, isn't it?
This is very intriguing, Foster air is the most abundant resource we have, if this became our main source of gasoline then I think we would see oil companies investing in measures to prevent deforestation, which is a fairly big problem and in water which is the second most important resource we have. It wouldn't solve the pollutant problem, but it would lower the price of gas. Oil companies love there money and if they see an opportunity for money they would jump at the chance. In my opinion this wouldn't fix all the environmental problems or the political and economic one that accompany it but it can most definitely benefit us.
I see your point Foster. I did think about what happens if we run out of water because of this and in 2025 they will need to develop ways to drink the oil??? Yuck. But like Levi said, air is abundance thanks to our vegetation, but as well as 70% of Earth's oxygen comes from the ocean from algae and various plankton. Air is literary everywhere, so that is out of the question. Water will also never run out, although we could run out of drinkable water if we aren't careful with our environment but in terms of water actually running out and turning Earth into a gigantic desert it isn't possible because there is no other way water can leave this planet; it is everywhere in different forms. Evaporation into the atmosphere and it rains back down and considering the fact that Earth is 75% water any ways I do not think we would exhaust that in time for water to refill itself be it rain, snow, etc. Thankfully why this is a great way to produce gasoline is the fact that since it is made up of natural resources it can't harm the environment with its emissions any more than our current gasoline.
Even though there is the fact that our world is 97.5 % water, there is always the scare of what could happen if that water were to disapear. (1) Our bodies have the basic need for water. 90% of our bodies are water. (2) Without water we would not be able to survive. The fact that companies are attempting to tell us that they can make fuel and gas out of water and air is, in my opnion rediculous. How are we going to use even more of the air, water and different resources that are already being reduced every moment. Our world is already experiencing major issues in the way that we are treating our atmosphere and polluting the water, if these process' continue how much more will our world be polluted. It is time to take a step away from the gasoline views and begin to look at a way of simply creating clean energy without using raw resources to create more greenhouse gases.
I strongly agree with Mimi's comment with the fact that companies are attempting to tell us that they can make fuel and gas out of water and air is ridiculous. Every natural resource was obviously put here on earth for a specific reason, and everyone of them are essential to life. I believe air and water are the two most important resources to all living things. Both air and water are being reduced everyday due to everything effecting it causing air pollution and water pollution. Gasoline is part of the reason why there is air pollution and water pollution in the first place, and it is a greenhouse gas. We really need to look at the bigger picture here and focus more on the problems we bring about on earth, knowing that it is our only one and we cannot take it for granted.
Because there is already a lot of air pollution all over the world. I believe that scientists should be more focused on how to eliminate it from the atmosphere, appose to trying to create gas. The reason for that is because air is just simply more important than gasoline. People need clean air for breathing.
This brings me back to something I was reading online which stated facts about the air pollution in Canada. In it, it said " In ontario 1.800 people die prematurely each year due to poor air quality" as well as " Asthma rates in children have increased by 60% in the past decade. (1)" I found this interesting because both of these facts are due to air pollution, which is also from greenhouse gasses, which also comes from things such as gasoline.
Water is another natural resource that is one o the most important, and sadly something that most people take for granted. Water and life are inseparable. No known living thing can function without water, and there is life wherever there is water on earth (2). Using the water to create gasoline is only taking away from the people who need it to survive. Many places in the world are already dealing with the issue that they don't have clean water, much less, clean drinking water.
This brings me to my conclusion that I believe this is a bad idea and is something that we as people will have to deal with in the long run. Although it would be beneficial to people right now it would be something that is an issue in the future. I believe it is a societal lag, although the direction of this change can be seen as both a positive or negative.
I think, since this is such a hotly debated topic I'd try to engage some of you in a discussion on the subject of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender. I saw a video (I'll post the link below.) earlier today of a religious official talking at a city council meeting about how a bill in the city his from allowing it shouldn't be allowed because it "out steps the boundaries set by God." and also further explained how it is a sign of the end times. For the record I would like to say my family keeps a fairly protestant household, but as most of you will know I do not fully agree with the views set by my pre-determined religion. I have friends who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, I personally have no problem with that. Yes, there are things I do agree with and things I don't agree with, I believe in God and I do believe that he loves all of his children no matter what. I'm sure there are people of other sexual orientation that are religious, and because of that choice they made they don't fully take on that religions views and in my opinion there is no problem with that. When he says that this is a sign of end times, I again respectfully disagree, I think it's a sign that humanity is moving forward and we are finally working towards a world where we can all live together. Anyone else's thoughts be you religious of any kind, are open to religion, or refute religion and believe in something other than religion.
In response to Ben's comment, I do agree that the mindset towards lesbian and gays should be one that is kept open. Yes, many will argue that to be homosexual is against the word of God and that it is "wrong." I strongly, strongly disagree. I too reside with a family who is fairly close-minded to the idea of homosexuality, it is a topic of constant debate within my household. However, my substantiating argument is and always will be that we as humans have the right to love whomever we choose and no one should be able to judge or belittle us for it. Love should be considered equal whether it be between two men, two women or one of each. The sooner we as a human race and society can accept that, the better a world we provide for generations to come. Humans have always had troubles with accommodating change, but in time, we get there. As a result, I am optimistic that it is only a matter of time before we realize that love won’t suddenly make every day okay. It won’t change who you are. It won’t make your car go faster. It doesn't even wash your dishes. All love is, is love. And that’s all it needs to be really.
Afghanistan. That place where the war is. Taliban? Information TIME!
Okay so the question of the day is, "Are drugs bad?" Woah! Huge topic, I know, and I'll only cover a very small portion today. Even smaller because it's only in Afghanistan.
So drugs aren't all bad, I decided. There are a few countries in the world that wouldn't exist without them. Afghanistan, for one.
According to the 2007 United Nations report on Drugs and Crime, "In 2007, 92% of the non-pharmaceutical-grade opiates on the world market originated in Afghanistan." [1] This equated to approximately $4,000,000,000, which, at the time, was MORE THAN HALF their GDP. [2]
Having said this, it becomes clear that Afghanistan would not have the stability it does without illegal drugs. They are also the world's largest Hashish producer, again contributing to their GDP. [3]
Drugs here are illegal, however and this causes the price to rise, the demand to be greater (for they are now romanticised), and also the illegality of the drugs forces the government (the UN, the U.S. and many other countries, including Afghanistan itself) to spend countless dollars on monitoring/arresting these people.
According to the Strategic Studies Institute, "an Afghan farmer can make 17 times more profit growing opium poppy— $4,622 per hectare, compared to only $266 per hectare for wheat. Opium poppy is also drought resistant, easy to transport and store, and, unlike many crops, requires no refrigeration and does not spoil." [4] This having been pointed out, it becomes clear that this is a better option or the farmers, and citizens.
Were these drugs legal the war therein would likely die down very quickly, and many other positive results would come of it, too. Inge Fryklund, a prosecutor in the US in the 1980s, and a woman who spent 4 years in Afghanistan, says "Corrupt Afghan officials would suddenly lose a source of income, as poppy is illegal in Afghanistan primarily at U.S. insistence. The Taliban would be unable to extract protection money from farmers, or tax the drug trade. The war might wind down to a speedy conclusion, and Afghanistan could fund its own development and security forces out of sales of a legal commodity."[5] These benefits are undeniable, and personally, they convince me that maybe these drugs shouldn't be illegal (such as in Portugal).
Tune in next week for more on the riveting topic of "Drug trade, and its unnecessary war"
The United States portrays itself as a strong and sovereign nation that is the greatest, but it is a country of lies, deceit and conspiracy and it is filled with corruption. Now before I explain let me first inform you about a little place called Djibouti; located ten miles off of the Somalian border, it is a former French colony and has fewer than one million inhabitants. This location is ideal for Camp Lemonnier, first established by the French but now the U.S. occupy it and lease it to the city for about 38 million dollars a year. Now getting in to the secret nature of the U.S. Apart from the Afghan war zone this base is the busiest drone base that the country operates, with 16 planes taking off and landing in a day. Now each division of the base has been compartmentalized which is very suspicious; the planes are flown from America and the ground crews don't know where the UAVs are going, how long they'll be or when they will come back. There is a liaison for both and he/she is known as "Frog" and how's this for a conspiracy, congressional committees don't even know who it is. [1] [2] Read more in the Washington Post link below.
A new study confirms that there is a virtual epidemic of rare congenital birth defects in cities that suffered bombing and artillery and small arms fire in the U.S.-led attacks and occupations of the country.(1)Some Iraqi doctors have been studying for years now and it seems traces of metal have been found in various people living within these cities in Iraq--Fallujah and Basra. Metals such as mercury and lead, which are common metals found in bombs, bullets, etc. Savabieasfahani was interviewed about the matter, and she said that it seems to be getting worse the more people are exposed to whatever it for sure that is causing these birth defects. She thinks it is best to do environmental testing in order to find the source of this growing issue. Once the source is found it can be cleaned up to stop the spread of these birth defects.
Adults being exposed to these metals can also cause many issues. Lead poisoning can result in anemia, a lead line on the gums, developmental disorders, sterility and abortion, and much worse. Mercury poisoning can lead to increased excitability, mental instability, tendency to weep, fine tremors of the hands and feet, and personality change, etc. Of coarse however, even poisoning of either could lead to death.
Another question I thought was rather important, is that it was stated that this suffering started from the U.S led attacks; therefore, shouldn't the U.S put in financial support to fix this problem?
I thought this would be interesting for all you environmentalists out there. In a recent discovery, scientists in a small British company have discovered a way to make gasoline out of air and water. The process is long and at the moment it doesn't pump out enough gas for all of use to use at once; 1.3 gallons of gasoline refined over a 3 month period.(1) but that will change they believe when more research is put into this. There isn't much of estimated costs for this project but it seems to be a turning point for moving it forward on a large scale with proof that they have built the thing together and shown that it works. (2) Read more about it in the links below.
ReplyDeleteAlso, what are your thoughts on this "guilt free" gasoline?
Sources:
1.http://sourcefednews.com/scientists-make-gasoline-from-the-air/
2.http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/scientists-make-gas-air.html
Wait. Why is this better? Firstly, we need both air and water more than we need gasoline, in theory.
DeleteSecondly, not only is this solution using up other important elements of the Earth, but it will also do... what for the burning of the oil? "guilt-free"? It'll burn the same way, as I see it, and the emission of the gas is a greater issue than the mining, isn't it?
This is very intriguing, Foster air is the most abundant resource we have, if this became our main source of gasoline then I think we would see oil companies investing in measures to prevent deforestation, which is a fairly big problem and in water which is the second most important resource we have. It wouldn't solve the pollutant problem, but it would lower the price of gas. Oil companies love there money and if they see an opportunity for money they would jump at the chance. In my opinion this wouldn't fix all the environmental problems or the political and economic one that accompany it but it can most definitely benefit us.
DeleteI see your point Foster. I did think about what happens if we run out of water because of this and in 2025 they will need to develop ways to drink the oil??? Yuck. But like Levi said, air is abundance thanks to our vegetation, but as well as 70% of Earth's oxygen comes from the ocean from algae and various plankton. Air is literary everywhere, so that is out of the question. Water will also never run out, although we could run out of drinkable water if we aren't careful with our environment but in terms of water actually running out and turning Earth into a gigantic desert it isn't possible because there is no other way water can leave this planet; it is everywhere in different forms. Evaporation into the atmosphere and it rains back down and considering the fact that Earth is 75% water any ways I do not think we would exhaust that in time for water to refill itself be it rain, snow, etc. Thankfully why this is a great way to produce gasoline is the fact that since it is made up of natural resources it can't harm the environment with its emissions any more than our current gasoline.
DeleteEven though there is the fact that our world is 97.5 % water, there is always the scare of what could happen if that water were to disapear. (1) Our bodies have the basic need for water. 90% of our bodies are water. (2) Without water we would not be able to survive. The fact that companies are attempting to tell us that they can make fuel and gas out of water and air is, in my opnion rediculous. How are we going to use even more of the air, water and different resources that are already being reduced every moment. Our world is already experiencing major issues in the way that we are treating our atmosphere and polluting the water, if these process' continue how much more will our world be polluted. It is time to take a step away from the gasoline views and begin to look at a way of simply creating clean energy without using raw resources to create more greenhouse gases.
Delete1.http://www.universetoday.com/65588/what-percent-of-earth-is-water/
2.http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/propertyyou.html
This is my weekly post.
DeleteI strongly agree with Mimi's comment with the fact that companies are attempting to tell us that they can make fuel and gas out of water and air is ridiculous. Every natural resource was obviously put here on earth for a specific reason, and everyone of them are essential to life. I believe air and water are the two most important resources to all living things. Both air and water are being reduced everyday due to everything effecting it causing air pollution and water pollution. Gasoline is part of the reason why there is air pollution and water pollution in the first place, and it is a greenhouse gas. We really need to look at the bigger picture here and focus more on the problems we bring about on earth, knowing that it is our only one and we cannot take it for granted.
Because there is already a lot of air pollution all over the world. I believe that scientists should be more focused on how to eliminate it from the atmosphere, appose to trying to create gas. The reason for that is because air is just simply more important than gasoline. People need clean air for breathing.
This brings me back to something I was reading online which stated facts about the air pollution in Canada. In it, it said " In ontario 1.800 people die prematurely each year due to poor air quality" as well as " Asthma rates in children have increased by 60% in the past decade. (1)" I found this interesting because both of these facts are due to air pollution, which is also from greenhouse gasses, which also comes from things such as gasoline.
Water is another natural resource that is one o the most important, and sadly something that most people take for granted. Water and life are inseparable. No known living thing can function without water, and there is life wherever there is water on earth (2). Using the water to create gasoline is only taking away from the people who need it to survive. Many places in the world are already dealing with the issue that they don't have clean water, much less, clean drinking water.
This brings me to my conclusion that I believe this is a bad idea and is something that we as people will have to deal with in the long run. Although it would be beneficial to people right now it would be something that is an issue in the future. I believe it is a societal lag, although the direction of this change can be seen as both a positive or negative.
(1)www.cleanair.ca/news/n00july-needcleanair.html
(2)http://m.icb.oxfordjournals.org/content/45/5/683.full
My computer will not let me edit my post but that is my weekly post.
DeleteI think, since this is such a hotly debated topic I'd try to engage some of you in a discussion on the subject of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender. I saw a video (I'll post the link below.) earlier today of a religious official talking at a city council meeting about how a bill in the city his from allowing it shouldn't be allowed because it "out steps the boundaries set by God." and also further explained how it is a sign of the end times. For the record I would like to say my family keeps a fairly protestant household, but as most of you will know I do not fully agree with the views set by my pre-determined religion. I have friends who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, I personally have no problem with that. Yes, there are things I do agree with and things I don't agree with, I believe in God and I do believe that he loves all of his children no matter what. I'm sure there are people of other sexual orientation that are religious, and because of that choice they made they don't fully take on that religions views and in my opinion there is no problem with that. When he says that this is a sign of end times, I again respectfully disagree, I think it's a sign that humanity is moving forward and we are finally working towards a world where we can all live together. Anyone else's thoughts be you religious of any kind, are open to religion, or refute religion and believe in something other than religion.
ReplyDeleteAlso here is the video: http://sourcefednews.com/why-gays-are-bad-for-america-watch-the-whole-video/
DeleteIn response to Ben's comment, I do agree that the mindset towards lesbian and gays should be one that is kept open. Yes, many will argue that to be homosexual is against the word of God and that it is "wrong." I strongly, strongly disagree. I too reside with a family who is fairly close-minded to the idea of homosexuality, it is a topic of constant debate within my household. However, my substantiating argument is and always will be that we as humans have the right to love whomever we choose and no one should be able to judge or belittle us for it. Love should be considered equal whether it be between two men, two women or one of each. The sooner we as a human race and society can accept that, the better a world we provide for generations to come. Humans have always had troubles with accommodating change, but in time, we get there. As a result, I am optimistic that it is only a matter of time before we realize that love won’t suddenly make every day okay. It won’t change who you are. It won’t make your car go faster. It doesn't even wash your dishes. All love is, is love. And that’s all it needs to be really.
ReplyDelete(1)http://news.uchicago.edu/article/2011/09/28/americans-move-dramatically-toward-acceptance-homosexuality-survey-finds
Afghanistan. That place where the war is. Taliban? Information TIME!
ReplyDeleteOkay so the question of the day is, "Are drugs bad?" Woah! Huge topic, I know, and I'll only cover a very small portion today. Even smaller because it's only in Afghanistan.
So drugs aren't all bad, I decided. There are a few countries in the world that wouldn't exist without them. Afghanistan, for one.
According to the 2007 United Nations report on Drugs and Crime, "In 2007, 92% of the non-pharmaceutical-grade opiates on the world market originated in Afghanistan." [1] This equated to approximately $4,000,000,000, which, at the time, was MORE THAN HALF their GDP. [2]
Having said this, it becomes clear that Afghanistan would not have the stability it does without illegal drugs. They are also the world's largest Hashish producer, again contributing to their GDP. [3]
Drugs here are illegal, however and this causes the price to rise, the demand to be greater (for they are now romanticised), and also the illegality of the drugs forces the government (the UN, the U.S. and many other countries, including Afghanistan itself) to spend countless dollars on monitoring/arresting these people.
According to the Strategic Studies Institute, "an Afghan farmer can make 17 times more profit growing opium poppy— $4,622 per hectare, compared to only $266 per hectare for wheat. Opium poppy is also drought resistant, easy to transport and store, and, unlike many crops, requires no refrigeration and does not spoil." [4] This having been pointed out, it becomes clear that this is a better option or the farmers, and citizens.
Were these drugs legal the war therein would likely die down very quickly, and many other positive results would come of it, too. Inge Fryklund, a prosecutor in the US in the 1980s, and a woman who spent 4 years in Afghanistan, says "Corrupt Afghan officials would suddenly lose a source of income, as poppy is illegal in Afghanistan primarily at U.S. insistence. The Taliban would be unable to extract protection money from farmers, or tax the drug trade. The war might wind down to a speedy conclusion, and Afghanistan could fund its own development and security forces out of sales of a legal commodity."[5] These benefits are undeniable, and personally, they convince me that maybe these drugs shouldn't be illegal (such as in Portugal).
Tune in next week for more on the riveting topic of "Drug trade, and its unnecessary war"
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_production_in_Afghanistan
2. http://www.unodc.org/india/afghanistan_gdp_report.html
3. http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/2010/March/afghanistan-leads-in-hashish-production-says-unodc.html
4. http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub804.pdf
5. http://www.alternet.org/world/how-legalizing-drugs-would-strengthen-democracy-afghanistan-mexico?page=0%2C2
Post-Script. This is my weekly post.
DeleteThis is my weekly post...
ReplyDeleteThe United States portrays itself as a strong and sovereign nation that is the greatest, but it is a country of lies, deceit and conspiracy and it is filled with corruption. Now before I explain let me first inform you about a little place called Djibouti; located ten miles off of the Somalian border, it is a former French colony and has fewer than one million inhabitants. This location is ideal for Camp Lemonnier, first established by the French but now the U.S. occupy it and lease it to the city for about 38 million dollars a year. Now getting in to the secret nature of the U.S. Apart from the Afghan war zone this base is the busiest drone base that the country operates, with 16 planes taking off and landing in a day. Now each division of the base has been compartmentalized which is very suspicious; the planes are flown from America and the ground crews don't know where the UAVs are going, how long they'll be or when they will come back. There is a liaison for both and he/she is known as "Frog" and how's this for a conspiracy, congressional committees don't even know who it is. [1] [2]
Read more in the Washington Post link below.
1 - http://sourcefednews.com/us-predator-drone-base-is-cray/
2 - http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/remote-us-base-at-core-of-secret-operations/2012/10/25/a26a9392-197a-11e2-bd10-5ff056538b7c_story.html
This is my weekly post...
ReplyDeleteA new study confirms that there is a virtual epidemic of rare congenital birth defects in cities that suffered bombing and artillery and small arms fire in the U.S.-led attacks and occupations of the country.(1)Some Iraqi doctors have been studying for years now and it seems traces of metal have been found in various people living within these cities in Iraq--Fallujah and Basra. Metals such as mercury and lead, which are common metals found in bombs, bullets, etc. Savabieasfahani was interviewed about the matter, and she said that it seems to be getting worse the more people are exposed to whatever it for sure that is causing these birth defects. She thinks it is best to do environmental testing in order to find the source of this growing issue. Once the source is found it can be cleaned up to stop the spread of these birth defects.
Adults being exposed to these metals can also cause many issues. Lead poisoning can result in anemia, a lead line on the gums, developmental disorders, sterility and abortion, and much worse. Mercury poisoning can lead to increased excitability, mental instability, tendency to weep, fine tremors of the hands and feet, and personality change, etc. Of coarse however, even poisoning of either could lead to death.
Another question I thought was rather important, is that it was stated that this suffering started from the U.S led attacks; therefore, shouldn't the U.S put in financial support to fix this problem?
(1)http://www.globalissues.org/news/2012/10/26/15144
http://www.green-ct.org/LEADOR~1.HTM