Would people be so interested in renewable energy if "global cooling" was a problem?

Any change in the global environmental pattern is dangerous. Adaptation of any alternate practises depends upon the necessity and also it's viability. I am sure, to stop the problem of global cooling, use of renewable energy is must, then yes.
 
Yes, because use of fossil fuels causes pollution other than CO2. Burning coal causes acid rain, mercury pollution, and the environmental damage from mining operations. Oil causes air pollution, oil spills at sea, and dependence on oil imports, which affects national security.
 
blessings...I believe that anything we can do for "Mother Nature" is our duty an our privilege.all the bull that there pumping into the speeches they can't keep are a slap to our planet.And what about arnold saying that there's no money for are parks and there gonna close something like 48 of them?I don't see him giving anything out of income...he's living"high on the Hog(know offense to the animals)?what have they really done to improve anything that hasn't cost some other part of the big blues a price.the only ones out on the front lines do it for the love of the planet,not some big promise just to keep everyone happy!The government is selfish,planet abusing and pocket stuffer's.I'm not saying all people in government are bad,just the ones who care more about the buck than who really gives them what they have....and that is this place we call home an all of the gifts that we were given are treated as commodities an we all own what has been given.so do I think would they pump out a bunch out of bull to take on an create more problems?absolutely....will it work? no its not in our hands and its defiantly not in theirs...but nature will remind them an when there loved ones look up an ask why our Planet is getting ready to clear her surface from the trials from what we call human beings...what will they tell them?blessed be...!
 
Wouldn't be as interested.

It would still be a major growing field; for example, the Bush administration didn't care about climate change at all, and pushed massive growth in ethanol because of energy security. Even though ethanol is barely better than petrol in terms of greenhouse gases and it's worse in many other ways (air pollution, food security etc)
 
Funnily enough, Global Cooling was a big concern in the 1970s. An now 30 years later it's been decided that Global Warming is definitely going to kill us all. In 2030 when we're all still here and nothing terrible has happened we'll still have to deal with...uh Global Lukwarming?
 
Yes.

Even with global cooling, we still have limited energy resources which are essential in the way we live. We need to invest and continue looking for alternative energy including renewables OR change the way our society operates.

Our reliance on fossil fuels is a seperate matter from global warming. The only link they have is that the more fossil fuels we use, the more emissions we release. Even if the earth wasn't warming, the need for renewable energy will always be there.
 
Back
Top