Global warming effects countered in 1 year ?

[Guest Soberman]

Just a thought probably not a new one. If every country capable of growing cannabis in natural sun light did so on all spare land across the globe maybe we could counter CO2 production in 1 year. I hear Cannabis produces 4 x more oxegen than trees. The only problem is what would we do with all that herb ?, Smoke some, make some massive paper stocks, bio fuels maybe.

I know there are various politcal views and some of them are based on being against the status quo. I think maybe a more positive approach would be being pro a good idea rather than anti everything that has gone thus far. Most people with 1/2 a brian could come up with it, it's implementation that is going to be a bit more tricky.

Though to me it seems relatively easy compared with redeveloping every "technology" developed. More of a tweak to existing means. I reckon I could even convince some pretty conservative people that would be a very good approach compared with saying we have to restructure every aspect of society from work, fossil fuel extraction whch powers all economies from brick firing to powering tractors and diggers, aircraft, trains, boats and cars etc.

Could you imagine if the worlds top scientists and seed sellers created a strain that could produce 10 x more oxegen. Maybe it could be called "Global Saviour"

Sure that has to be the No.1 solution right now to get much needed haste into the countering of CO2 emissions.

Love further thoughts and ideas ?

Edited December 15, 2012 by Soberman

[Flobalobalobalot]

yep, brilliant, ,

4 x more oxegen mykst with 1/2 a brian, ought to sort things out, Soberman

& i'll help you to burn lots & make more Co2 for our next crop to absorb..

[Eddiesilence]

Just a thought probably not a new one. If every country capable of growing cannabis in natural sun light did so on all spare land across the globe maybe we could counter CO2 production in 1 year.

If all the spare land were planted with hemp, what would the consequences be to the environment, the ecological balance, biodiversity, etc?

Secondly, I'd raise the problem of practicality: I've heard if everyone in China were to jump off a chair at the same time, a tsunami would engulf California. It might be true, but what's the likelihood you'll get everyone to jump off a chair at the same time to test the theory?

[Guest Soberman]

Right dude no time like the present, I will go get Brian....

Thats a very good point and expert input from Botanists etc would be vital, ok not every bit of land but as much as is practically possible. We manage forests right? (well some people do) well I think we could manage mass growth of cannabis.. afterall a worthy cause. I mean swathes of grassland could be sacrificed for the greater good I think. Relocation of insect populations/ grass seed banks could be mainatained so if, when equilibrium is achieved we can adjust the balance of herb back to grassland.

Surely, even in the worst possible case a few extinct species would be worth it to save the planet from total catastophy ?

Bottom line is this is actually extremely easy to do, when you consider the extreme technical problems and monetary investment in extracting oil.(especially from black rock like in Canada). Even if 5pct of the money invested in all other energy forms was invested by governments globally it would quickly counter the inevitable inflation of costs for all raw material that is going to be produced by global warming over the next 30 years. The problem is political short termism which does not build for the future, short term profits have been gained vs the huge (and only just manifesting) sacrifice of long term global environmental problems. As always the poorest will bear the brunt of it. Only a week ago some nations agreed in principle a compensation charter for poor nations from CO2 emission consequences. Well why not f*ck that off and instead resolve the problem rather than being complicit and saying ok we are not turning back or considering counter measure, we are accepting armageddon ultimately. See, thats the current short termist backwards sh*t.

In essence the programme would be free as it would counter the inflated prices of global commodities on the global trade markets. There would be mass volunteers, like millions and millions of people globally would sign up to planting/harvesting programmes. You, me, and him, her......

We need to get some open minded people in government not this backwards old skool lot. They think they are intelligent and they do have certain skills which we can consider make them intelligent but this requires new intelligence, the intelligence of a species about to exterminate itself.

I will sum this up:

"The only thing between us and resolving global warming in it's entirety is a few people in power who have not done so thus far despite having the power and means to do so."

Thats quite a thought to ponder.

but what's the likelihood you'll get everyone to jump off a chair at the same time to test the theory?

The likelyhood that we are probably going to exterminate ourselves might help?

Edited December 15, 2012 by Soberman

[Flobalobalobalot]

my full support for ideas towards a better world Soberman.

"Why use the forests which were centuries in the making and the mines which required ages to lay down, if we can get the equivalent of forest and mineral products in the annual growth of the fields?" ~Henry Ford.

"The greatest service that can be rendered any country is to add a useful plant to it's culture." ~Thomas Jefferson.

"Save The Planet? The planet isn't going anywhere, we are. We're going away, pack your shit folks. We won't leave much of a trace either. . . maybe a little Styrofoam. The planet will be here, we'll be long gone, just another failed mutation...The planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas, a surface nuisance. You want to know how the planet's doing? Ask those people at Pompeii who are frozen into position." ~George Carlin.