h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hello everyone.

I was wondering if people would have a quick peek at my new and totally unfinished entry A804665 and leave me a few comments. I need something to chew on and I'd appreciate your input.

Marcus Aurelius
(If this is the wrong place to do this then sorry, and please let me know where I should take my request. Many thanks)

Very well written article.
Puts across some interesting views. Not really sure how I'd alter it. The title does need shortening but no idea what to.

The world only has limited resouces. There is only so much arrible land, and so much need for grown produce.

The world will never become richer or poorer, because we are a self contained planet. We own all we are, it's the distribution that changes.

Thanks Simon. I disagree with you on the concept of isolation but I appreciate your comments. Thanks.

I think I'm right (and admittedly I've yet to do the research ) in saying that energy reaches our planet at every single moment. Mostly from the sun in radiation, light, heat, magnetic whatsit stuff etc.

Also, energy leaves our planet constantly. For example sunlight (that is not harnessed in some way) bounces off the planet and it's atmopshere, and some artificial light generated by street lamps is wasted by being beemed out through the atmosphere. Radio waves are another example.

Of course not everyone will agree with me and it's possible I'm wrong, but that's my basic proposal and I would suggest that in terms of physics (and thus material energy) we are not isolated.

Thanks for your comments though.

Actually I think I've just proved one of your theories right.
I'm no economist, but I do value the world in monetary terms.

I'm not sure it's energy we get from the sun, we just get rays of heat and light, but we are capable of turning those into energy. We find it much easier to dig up coal and oil as if it's a limitless source and use that for our main energy supply. Even nuclear energy strongly relies on these fossil fuels to exist.

I'm not sure I agree about bettering our planet jus to make it more competetive in an unknown galaxy, but I think we all have the duty to ensure this world is a better palce for our descendants.

Glad my comments didn't offend. Just shooting the breeze really, I think we share a similar view on what should be done to this planet of ours.

Errrrr....

...little bit of clarification necessary I think, thanks to Simon's suggestion.

Is it possible to increase arrable (sp?) land?
Yeah, farm on the roof of your house.

How much need for produce?
Well, this kind of misses the point. The human and animal populations determine how much arable produce can be consumed, sure. You can't feed 2 billion people when there are only 1 billion. But you can use plants to capture sunlight, turn it into carbon and use that carbon as an energy resource. The point is that the energy hasn't bounced off the earth to drift through space but has been 'caught' by the plants and turned into a energy form that we can make use of.

By the way, the whole plants thing is merely the first example I thought.

But hey! If you have an arguement to disprove my theory then take it up by replying to my page. Maybe others will agree with you and maybe the outcome of all this is we will prove the opposite of wht I intended to prove! You never know.

Marcus

Erm...I seem to remember from my Physics studies that heat and light ARE forms of energy...

s off to read the entry properly

I agree with you Simon. I think we and many people have the same view on what needs to be done. Actually, I think you'll find my views are closer to yours than my entry would suggest. My whole entry is actually going to be an essay to reconcile the desires and greed of business with the common sense fact that we need to take care of our planet. If businesses can see that they too would profit from looking after the Earth then they may just start thinking about ways to be more green.

This is already happening in some ways because companies see the benefits of appealing to the public over green issues in an effort to win their custom. If this can be coupled with an understanding that the Earth is in itself an economic market of energy (and energy is a way to make money ) then thier interest will be increased. Good for the planet, good for the people, good for business and good for my ego. hehehe.

Marcus

Right, have read it now.

Yes, having worked in the field (no pun intended!) of forestry and accounting, I've lost count of the arguments put to Governments to plant more trees. Government funding isn't very forthcoming for something which takes 50 years to produce results.

One forester's meomrable description of a tree was "solid sunshine".

Destruction of the rainforests is a Very Bad Thing indeed.

And I did read a theory that the recent disastrous flooding in Europe was the result not so much of global warming, but of the reduction in the area under forest.

So get out there and plant some trees dammit!

Yes indeed, heat and light are forms of energy. So is chemical (stored) energy and kinetic (movement) energy. Then of course there is electricity, radiation and all kinds of other forms.

The trick is to make the best use of it and get the most out of it.

Thanks for taking the time to read, Luckystar. And cheers again Simon for A) advancing the debate, B) proving the theory of monetary conception, and C) Being a great sport and taking the time to help me out with your suggestions.

to all.

Marcus

The main problem is that businesses only look at the bottom line. While it's nice that many of them are making changes to appeal to the greener customers. They aren't doing it out of the kindness of thier hearts, they are trying to nick some profit from competetors, by tapping a new market.

Show them a few more financial carrots for going green, and you'll be amazed how quickly they change. Governments have the biggest role to play in this battle as they still hold the purse strings of all companies.

Simon,

Now you're with me. That's exactly what I'm trying to do - give businesses 'financial carrots to go green'. I love the term!

Feel free to use it. It's organic, so I can easily grow another one

Good luck in your quest! Let me know how you get on.

Ok, will do, and thanks for the term. If everyone can now post on the page please .... A804665 .... I'd love to discuss it further with everyone.

Luckystar, your expertise (?) in forestry and accounting would be extremely useful. Please consider making contributions to the entry as it developes. I'm not sure how to share an entry yet but I can work it out if necessary. Otherwise please post replies.

Ta!

I'm no expert myself, but I think you submit it to the colaberated writing workshop if you want to share it and want some more oppinions.

Good luck
Si

Few points that occured to me.
What someone said earlier on about the floods in Europe being caused by change in environment and deforestation is in my oppinion not true. They already have had floods like this before in Europe, and not just before as in 10 years ago, nut more something like 100 years ago when the envirnment hadn't changed much at all by human interference. And one person pointed out that this is an extreme. And it's not extremes that make up the normal averege environment, but it's the avereges. The increase in temperature caused by environmental change doesn't come from one or two days when it's warmer than 30(in Holland that's very warm)they come from the averege of one or two years when the averege temperature changes by maybe half a degree or one...
Foodwise we don't need to worry to much. We are more than capable enough to feed everyone on this planet. I know this isn't your main point, but I thought I'd point it out anyway. As to using fossile fuels, The industrial sector will find out soon enough they aren't endless. Normal estimates predict oil will run out in about 30 years(correct me here if I'm wrong, don't have exact figures at hand). And there are a lot of alternatives and clean forms of energyproduction. But if I'm correct Biomass(using plants directly for energy)wouldn't be able to produce enough for this. There is the Hydrogencell(or whatever it is called)which supposedly is quite clean and efficient. And ofcourse Nuclearfusion(not fission). though that doesn't work yet, if it will it will completely change the way we think about energy. Clean and almost endless energy(more endless than oil as just a form of water is used).

Rod

Right, thanks Rod.

Some good pointers towards more efficient and clean energy resources there. I'll certainly take a look at them. But I'm more concerned with how energy-rich our planet is - not how we use that energy. That is a question for others, and one that many people are already advancing. What I'm trying to do is to make people think about ways of adding material/energy value to the planet so that the planet gets richer and not poorer as we consume it's resources. (in clean ways or not) As for the plants bit, well I'm going to have to re-write that because I'm being taken out of context. Obviously, since I wrote the article that's my fault and I will endeavour to correct it. It has nothing to do with feeding people and it's not about getting energy directly from plants either. It's more about ways to trap the energy that passes Earth by every day and keep it here both for our use and for the planet's wellfare.

Out of curiousity, has anyone ever thought about the consequences of using up all the oil? We all know that it'll force humans to seek other energy sources, sure, but what about the planet? Oil has been formed since the very beginning of plant life on this planet and you have to wonder if it has an integral part in the stability of the planet. The same goes for gas. Maybe these substances help keep the status-quo somehow. Or maybe using them up will actually help the planet. What do you think?

It seems the biggest problem I'm going to come up against is people's habit to think in human terms only. And of course the biggest worry is our habit to think in human economic terms only.

Regarding the plants / sunlight issue I took Lucinda's advice (thanks Lucinda) and looked at the guide entry for photosynthesis. I have now replaced my useless diagram with the following paragraph. Does this make more sense? Is it better to read? Comments welcome.

Check the h2g2 entry A588198 for details on how plants capture energy from the Sun in the process known as Photosynthesis. Incidentally check the language used by the author. Terms such as 'energy currency' are used and the entry begins with this paragraph: "Photosynthesis is the process in which sunlight is converted into usable energy by organisms, such as green plants. As almost all of the food on the planet originates from plants, this means that almost everything originates from the Sun."

Good change? Bad change? What do you think?

Marcus