[Black Wolf]

Right. I have to do this ****ty class this semester called "Introduction to Communication Skills" where in theory they teach us how to write reports. It's utter irritating ****e, with a teacher who... well, I don't want this to turn into a rant.

Anyway, for our latest report we have to do what he calls "Primary Research" Which, as far as I'm concerned, suggests real research, the kind you do in a lab. But he wants us to do a survey and interpret the results. I was going to make up some easy to interpert results, but I figured if I posted on here, I'd at least have a hard copy of the questions I asked, and some kinda real data. Anyway, if you could just answer a few quick questions, or even flip a coin and randomize some answers, that'd be cool. If not, well, fair enough.

1. Do you see global warming and climate change as a serious ecological problem.
2. Do you believe world governments see the risks of global warming and climate change?
3. Do you believe world governments generally are doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?
4. Do you believe the Australian government specifically is doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?
5. Geosequestration is a process currently considered by the Australian government that involves separating CO2 from large scale industrial emissions and storing this gas compressed underground. Do you believe this will have a significant impact on Australia's overall greenhouse gas emissions?

So, err, yeah. If you're not in Australia, uh, guess

[Fergus]

1) Yes
2) No to an extent, mainly they look at it to bet votes (looking at U.S.)
3) No (staring at U.S.)
4) I heard that they has some kind of initiative underway (which counrty doesn't?) so yes
5) No- well not if you use cars as much as European countries, if not yes.

Hope it's helpfull

[kasperl]

First off, I'm Dutch, in case you didn't notice, but I'll fill it in, just for boredoms sake.

1. No, global warming isn't all that evident in long periods over time. In Roman times, they could grow wine up to mid-Holland, while right now, the vines will only survive up to the southern most point.
2. (yes) Err, they see a risk all right, but I'm not so sure it's a real risk.
3. (yes) Well, since they probably can do bugger all to normal climate fluctuations, they're trying. 'Sides, the effort might help save som oil.
4. (yes) Dunno, but that plan to make power by a huge greenhouse in the middle of the desert with a big clonking pipe out of it was Aussie, wasn't it?
5. Nope, it might be temporarily be OK, but you're going to have to vent it at one point in time, right?

[Rictor]

1. Yes
2. Sporadically and insufficiently (if you want a yes or no, then no)
3. No
4. dunno
5. Beats me.

not very helpful, I know, but there it is.

[Tiara]

1). Frankly, i think people are paranoid to the extreme about it. * looks at Greenpeace treehuggers* In the Middle Ages the temperature also rose with a few degrees and at other times the dropped all because it's the natural way of things.

People freak out far too fast at the sight that the planet is warming up. It happened before and nowhere did the entire friggin' ecosystem collapse.

Sure, we might be polluting the planet quite a bit, but the most it'll do is change the weather slightly and the ecosystem will adjust as it always does.

As for the pollution itself, i think in time when the raw materials in this world get rarer and rarer (this is already happening, oil has passed it's peak a few years ago and the amount is dropping and dropping) that humanity will switch to enviroment friendly fuels and powersources.

Though this will mainly be driven by economical concerns rather then by ecological concerns.

2). They see the risk, but like me they agree that the global warming isn't a real threat to this world unless you artificially let it go on for centuries.

3). Right now, no. In time, yes. But once again, it will only be economically driven. In time, the substitutes for mining and processing raw material will be cheaper then mining deeper and deeper into the Earth's crust at more and more remote places.

4). They are doing what any country is doing and will do. Not enough and not too much. In time, {-insert answer 3-}.

5). No. Not before the events I described in answer 3 will take effect. By the time all intallations are equipped with such measures, raw materials will no longer be used and cleaner methods for most to all industries will be deviced. Hence, it'll be useless and costly.

[Flipside]

1) I believe it could be a problem, but when Caeser invaded the UK, southern England was described as 'A Land of Vines', which would have required the temperature to be somewhat higher back then, so temperature variances do happen. I think it's a serious concern, but too many people are looking for a 'Doomsday' these days.

2) Yes, they are fully aware of the risk. They are also fully aware of the cost of dealing with that risk. Global warming may not be a problem by itself, but may act as a catalyst to other, worse problems.

3) No. Tony Blair recently gave a speech (yesterday) stating that he feels the World needs to start acting more responsibly towards it's environment. For someone as Industry steered as Blair to make such a comment means quite a lot in World perspective, however, on should not forget the Elections in November.

4) I'll leave this to people with First Hand knowledge to answer, but my opinion from outside is that while it certainly has issues, Australia seems to be at least trying to consider their environment and to learn, where possible, from it's mistakes.

5) Any step taken is for the good at the end of the day, regardless of whether the danger is sooner or later, the less crap we pump into what we breath, the better. Cars are the biggest problem, but that is because of numbers, factories still pump out a hell of a lot.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Black Wolf


1. Do you see global warming and climate change as a serious ecological problem.
2. Do you believe world governments see the risks of global warming and climate change?
3. Do you believe world governments generally are doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?
4. Do you believe the Australian government specifically is doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?
5. Geosequestration is a process currently considered by the Australian government that involves separating CO2 from large scale industrial emissions and storing this gas compressed underground. Do you believe this will have a significant impact on Australia's overall greenhouse gas emissions?

So, err, yeah. If you're not in Australia, uh, guess

1/ Yes.  Whilst it is fair to say that the ecology and in particular weather is unpredictable and random, I think there is also strong evidence that it (pollution, etc) is having an effect.

2/ Yes and no.  I think they are aware there will be serious consequences in the future, but they don't care because they want to line their own pockets.

3/ Nope.  To be fair, it's hard when the worlds largest polluter pulls out of anti-pollution treaties.

4/ **** knows

5/ See 4/

[Vaelinx]

1. Do you see global warming and climate change as a serious ecological problem?

Yes, although change isn't the problem so much as irresponsible change.  (Like the amount of CO2 we've sent into the atmosphere/oceans)

2. Do you believe world governments see the risks of global warming and climate change?

They see it, it's just not important enough to their constituency for them to worry about it.  (not going to keep them from getting elected)

3. Do you believe world governments generally are doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?

No.  But then again, it's hard to regulate things when the people of the country don't disapprove of the harmful practices.  It's about perception and (mis)information.

4. Do you believe the Australian government specifically is doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?

Australia is doing more than most countries (why I may move there have my family to sponsor my visa and everything!).  Although, when is enough enough?  I would like more global cooperation with regards to this, but Australia isn't exacly a world power.  The only thing that will save us is new technology to get us off fossil fuels... (or make them more efficient) and to help repair existing damage.

5. Geosequestration is a process currently considered by the Australian government that involves separating CO2 from large scale industrial emissions and storing this gas compressed underground. Do you believe this will have a significant impact on Australia's overall greenhouse gas emissions?

I believe that will have an impact.  Significant?  They pay people to give numbers about what percentage of greenhouse gasses they can take care of this way.  But I don't think storing underground is the best solution...  it eventually has to get out, we just need to store it back into plant matter .

[mrfun]

1) yes
2) yes and they are willfully ignoring it
3) No
4) Can't say, not aussie, but it's a government after all, so No.
5) No- industrial emissions are very small compared to automotive and natural sources.

PS, this is about as unscientific a poll as you can get

[Black Wolf]

Originally posted by mrfun

PS, this is about as unscientific a poll as you can get

I know, but, on a scale of, say, one to ten, the amount I care about this particular subject is about...negative seventeen or so. I need to do it, but I don't need to do it well

Once I write/hand in the report, I'm actually looking forward to discussing some of the points brought up in this topic BTW.

[vyper]

1. Kinda
2. No
3. No
4. No, you have a government in power that's closer to Bush than us sometimes!
5. Yes, but it'll come back to haunt them in 50 odd years when it all leaks.

[Knight Templar]

Originally posted by Black Wolf

1. Do you see global warming and climate change as a serious ecological problem.
2. Do you believe world governments see the risks of global warming and climate change?
3. Do you believe world governments generally are doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?
4. Do you believe the Australian government specifically is doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?
5. Geosequestration is a process currently considered by the Australian government that involves separating CO2 from large scale industrial emissions and storing this gas compressed underground. Do you believe this will have a significant impact on Australia's overall greenhouse gas emissions?

So, err, yeah. If you're not in Australia, uh, guess

1) No. It's happened before in our planets history, and it has been fine. The only ones we should be worried about are ourselves.
2) Well, certainly not mine.
3) I don't really know. Don't follow up the environment too much. Again, I know my country doesn't care too much.
4) Probably more than G.W.
5) Deffinitely more than G.W. I'd take a guess and say yes, but not a whole lot.

[redmenace]

1. Do you see global warming and climate change as a serious ecological problem.
Well people need to understand that there is so much we don't understand about weather in general. Weather is a highly complex thing in general. We can't effectively predict it with any great certanty. Also years ago people were warning about the next ice age and what not.
2. Do you believe world governments see the risks of global warming and climate change?
Yes
3. Do you believe world governments generally are doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?
Yes, but there are certain world goverments that pollute more that other such as China
4. Do you believe the Australian government specifically is doing enough to combat global warming and climate change?
Umm I guess so
5. Geosequestration is a process currently considered by the Australian government that involves separating CO2 from large scale industrial emissions and storing this gas compressed underground. Do you believe this will have a significant impact on Australia's overall greenhouse gas emissions?
Umm no, what if that tank ruptures. There are too many what ifs.