Let's go through these, personally I don't think any would have an influence on climate change but I know some here can save some trees and be good for the environment. But none of these will have any effect on climate, sorry. Numbers 5 and 6 seem to be best for the environment to me.

1. Bicycle- Where I live in northwest Jersey you can't really use a bike to get around. It's already a 10 mintue drive doing 50mph to get a gallon of milk. Not to mention biking over mountains and hills is not very easy! (Good for your health though)

2. Condom- I really don't know what to say?

3. Ceiling Fan (Thermostat can be lowered)- Don't ceiling fans make the home cooler? Wouldn't you lower the thermostat all the way down in the summer anyway? That doesn't make sense.. I don't know it's late and maybe I'm missing something here...

4. Library book- How about the internet, all the old books can be burnt to heat homes. I'm kidding about that don't take it serious.

5. Microchip- This will help save the number of trees being logged and more online billing can be done which is easier and no stamps needed! It's a good idea in general.

6. The clothesline- Who doesn't love freshly dried clothes in summer sun! This cuts down your electric bill too! Just don't do it when pollen counts are high. If you have allegies its a bad idea, I would know...

7. Tomatoes- I have a garden full of fresh tomatoes and other veggies. It cuts down food spending and its great to go outside pick out a salad then eat it! Love it!

Too bad 4 of the 7 on that list are seasonal and mainly only meant for the summer time.

Just yesterday I was thinking a lot about the second item on this list. I was thinking at some point "somebody" is going to put pressure on the citizens to considering having less children. When I had a child back in the early 70s, I chose to only have 1 because I was trying to following the "zero population growth" protocol which was to only have one. I think at that time the average family had 3+ children which has gone down since then I think. I personally think the world is for the most part over populated and needs considerable thinning. If you think about a family of 4 life is challenging enough, but if you up that family to a say 6 kids it becomes daunting in this modern world. When people lived on farms, many hands were helpful and necessary. Food was raised on the farm. People made their own clothing and yes they dried their clothing on a clothes line. I did so myself when I lived in rural NJ, but when I then relocated to Dallas, TX that was not a habit done there that is for sure. I live rural again but I do not see any clothes lines in use anywhere. I just might consider putting up one again. Clothes smell so much better being aired outside.

I currently work at our family business that is nestled between two bike shops. I see more and more bikes being used which is a great thing. Our town is a college town and thus very well suited for the use of bikes. We also have a very nice bike trail throughout the area. As I mentioned another time, I am seeing farmers biking to their fields to do work. I think using bikes in many small communities and of course in large cities as having considerable impact.

Having said all that, I am still unconvinced there is global warming and that man is solely responsible if there is. I do believe there is always climate change. However minimizing pollution is extremely important to me and thus reducing car use, less planes, etc., I am all for. There is common ground between the skeptics and the alarmists.

Brett, I would like your take on all of the scientist, who do not share your views on global warming. Do you feel there is still a debate? The problem I have with "global warming" is how any discussion of its existence is being stifled. It seems from your posts as though there is no alternative to your belief and your premise for this article leaves no room for those of us who don't feel the same way you do about it.

-James

Reply: James, I try to keep my personal feelings about GW to myself since I am the moderator. I just posted this article because I thought it was quite interesting whether you believe in AGW or not and I wanted to hear your thoughts. I don't think we stifle discussion on this blog, not even close.

If we applied all of these practices on global level, how much reduction in CO2 emissions do you expect? and what about industries? nothing to do with them to reduce CO2??

To think that Mankind can have an impact on the weather by drying clothes on a clothesline or riding bikes is completely absurd. We cannot control nature. I wish people like this would stop trying to brainwash the world into giving up its freedoms all in the name of a hoax.

Item #2 would have the most impact. Reducing population would not only decrease our environmental footprint, but it would help solve many social and economic problems along the way. In addition, it is also the simplest item on this list to implement.

I think if we elimated the population we would have no problems at all to worry about. The moderated solution of reducing the population would help considerably but people are so unwilling to control this that it would take a strong government to enforce it and I think most people abhor being controlled like they are controlled in China. Most people have to encounter a deep moving event like a major tragedy or be forced by desperation to change their behavior. Using a condom or other birth prevention would require a change in behavior of most people. If used all the time the condom would be most effective in population reduction and thus polution reduction. Certain catagories of people desire large families, though, so this may not happen. I believe we are headed for a disaster that will elimate alot of population; then, we will have less global warming. One must remember that this economy is based on several things and one is the continued population growth to keep demand high.

Zero CO2 emissions? I bicycle 200+ miles per week and only very rarely get in a car. This burns up in excess of 10,000 kilocalories of hydrocarbons per week, generating huge amounts of CO2. In addition, I have to take a lot of extra showers (like when I arrive at work.) That also generates a huge amount of CO2. When me and my kids all ride bikes together to go shopping or the movie theater, each one of us generates a lot of CO2. Probably more than if we all drove in one car. The author is living in an eco-fantasy world. Bikes are great, but the real problem is that people live too far from work - like James Hansen who commutes 80 miles each way from central Pennsylvania into Columbia.

In addition, I nearly got killed in a bicycle accident in traffic last weekend. Fortunately I got away with only a broken hand, broken rib, lots of bruises and significant blood loss from a head wound. Cars and bicycles don't mix well in the US. Drivers are in too much of a rush all the time and don't see bicycles.

Condoms? For Europeans, the birth rate is about 0.9 children per couple. By contrast, the Muslim immigrants average about seven children per couple. By 2050, Holland will be dominantly Muslim and living under Sharian Law. Kernel Ghadaffi said that they will "capture Europe without firing a shot." Better go see Europe while it is still there.

Locally grown tomatoes make up more than 50% of my diet. They require huge amounts of water to grow here, but are vastly more environmentally friendly than beef. I have completely stopped eating meat, and feel great (other than my hand and rib.)

Seven Wonders For A Cooler Planet......Well, it has been a fairly cool spring and I can't really think I would want it cooler so maybe just saying the heck with the above items will solve that, Wait I still like tomatoes for spaghetti and pizza sauce. My book, Eight Wonders for a Warmer Planet.

Here we go again ........good ideas anytime but tarnished through agenda driven motives !

As shown from the first item on the list, and the subsequent inference with the other items, CO2 is the only concern ! This leads the reader to assume that CO2 is a pollutant ....IT IS NOT ! ! !

Instead of identifying REAL pollutants (chemicals) that kill millions every year, even as we speak, lets all feel fuzzy and non-committal and talk about CO2 and it's effects in 500 years !

If we tried to think for ourselves, instead of being told what to think, and understand that this infatuation with CO2 provides real polluters with an easy way out !..................... Let's "sequester" CO2 and forget about reducing/eliminating the sulfur, mercury, phosphates etc ............ A TRULY GREAT PHILOSOPHY INDEED !

Reports of CO2 concentrations as well as source regions are adjusted, averaged and presented in a very slanted context. So much adjusting, averaging and extrapolation is being performed that, as we see now, regions with decreased concentrations could show increases ! Hence the term GLOBAL in global warming. Not very honest ......is it ? ? ?

Mr. Joe Public will always be torn in this debate because he is totally not involved other than being the victim of the failed policies generated from CO2 pet projects. The simple facts surrounding this debate have become so confused, and frankly, dishonest, that our average citizen, Mr. J. Public, really doesn't care anymore. Every day we see polls that show that this CO2 issue is losing ground to more immediate problems within our society that have a REAL potential of being solved.

One of these days, I'm sure that someone will have the will and ....... well just plain GUTS to show the real disconnect between CO2 and pollution. Fighting pollution includes fighting of CO2 (by default), BUT fighting CO2 does NOT include fighting all pollution !

Which path is the most realistic seems to be clear enough ........ doesn't it ? ? ? ?

Forget CO2 .........it's only a propaganda tool to generate money and influence at ever increasing rates (and regions) with little or no accountability/responsibility at every level.

I have lived in Louisiana for 48years.The climate here is the same as it was in 1960.Could global warming be a yankee or left coast disease?

I think we could implement every one of them and not see any measurable difference in climate. In fact, I think it's time to start worrying about the solutions to a real problem we will eventually face, cooling.

1. Bicycle (0 CO2 emissions)

True for the bike--rider(s) don't breathe?

2. Condom (reduces population growth) Let's keep the comments in line with regards to this one please.

Manufacturing costs? (And there is a least one lower cost alternative.)

3. Ceiling Fan (Thermostat can be lowered).

Open a window, reduce costs more. (Won't do much for excess humidity, which is where most of the discomfort is.)

4. Library book (reused books, less need for newly manufactured goods).

Except for the 20+mile round trip to the library....Book company sends one (or several) to me for less transportation cost.

5. Microchip

How?

6. The clothesline

HOA would have me in court if I tried that.

7. Tomatoes (They are indeed easy to grow with many uses)

Now you are talking! (And home-grown are actually fit to eat. And can be canned for off-season use.)

This may seem to be a little simplistic but the other day here in southern Delaware I took my 2008 World Almanac and read that the two hottest days ever recorded were in North Africa in 1913 at 136 degrees and Death Valley, Calif. in 1922 at 134 degrees. I was thinking of the hundreds of billion tons of greenhouse gases released in the atmosphere since then wouldn`t it be reasonable to expect these two records to have been taken out at least 4 or 5 times since then? Also, while I was reading the couple next to me were complaining the Atlantic waters were colder than usual for this time of year. (end of June)

Ah, yes, the Seattle Times. No secret as to how they lean, right? Nah, it's all objective reporting (a la Dan Rather). But anyway, with regard to the list:

1. Bicycle (0 CO2 emissions)

REPLY: Sure, let's all ride our bikes, like the Chinese used to. A great way to level the playing field and send the U.S. economy into the toilet. Lifestyle alteration. How soon before the enviro-kooks lobby congress to make something like this mandatory?

2. Condom (reduces population growth) Let's keep the comments in line with regards to this one please.

REPLY: Tell it to the members of that ideology (who are hatching like rabbits) that hates us and hates western civilzation. Then get back to me.

3. Ceiling Fan (Thermostat can be lowered).

REPLY: Lower the theromostat and turn on the ceiling fan? Yep. Another great way to keep warm. Please, I am cold enough with this lousy weather and rain! I am not going to add to it.

4. Library book (reused books, less need for newly manufactured goods).

REPLY: Meanwhile, the school taxes go up and up an up because the schools keep spending spending spending on new books. Oh, wait, I am sorry. That's for the children. I forgot.

5. Microchip

REPLY: Huh? What does this have to do with anyting. Are they going to embed one in everyone's brain so the peasents can be monitored as to how much of a green life they are living????

6. The clothesline

REPLY: Ah, yes. let's wait forever for our clothes to dry so we can save that twig out back. Again, lifestyle alteration. See #1.

7. Tomatoes (They are indeed easy to grow with many uses).

REPLY: What about Corn? I thought corn was going to lead us to energy independence?

Now then, considering the fact that another cold front is headed this way, thus continuing the misery that is this never ending rainy and cold joke of a summer, let it be known that there is NOTHING TO SOLVE!!! And that Seattle is an enviro-looney cold city with nothing better to do but spew this leftist gorg. Anything to force you alter your lifestyle for the common good, ladies and gents. And it's not going above 80 for the whole 4th of July week!!!!!!

Brett: I WANT MY SUMMER BACK!!!!!!!

DENY DENY DENY THE GLO-BULL WARMING LIE!!!!!!!!

Thank you Brett for putting up more articles about solutions.

Whether we are motivated by climate change, the pain at the pump or national security issues it is time we all start looking at issues such as sustainability, energy use and population.

The Oil Drum has a nice video on exponential growth. It is scary how dangerous a 2% (or so) increase in oil use, CO2, population or material consumption is.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4226#more

Well, certainly good ideas. I've practiced all or most (is that vague enough?) of them at some point myself, but such simplistic ways to "solve global warming" hugely miss the mark. By implying that it's somehow easy to "solve" the problem, one veers into delusional territory, and given how such delusions can shape politics, can actually do harm.

Anyone who has seen logically laid out presentations of the scope and scale of the problem has to realize that "solving" global warming, in the sense that we can return Gaia to the state before evil Exxon existed, requires hard, hard, choices. I recently saw one such presentation that plotted up energy efficiencies of various countries, along with well-accepted growth curves showing the energy needs of the world going forward. The speaker logically stepped through scenarios where all of the world's developing and developed countries became as efficient as the most efficient developed country. He added optimistic projections of alternative energy sources. For good measure, he then showed the energy requirements if the most efficient country itself became more efficient by an additional 25%, and everyone matched that.

Pretty sobering. Can't get there by just changing light bulbs. And as far as population growth, lots of luck "enforcing" that one.

Extreme changes in either standard of living or in brute-force energy production are needed, and if mitigation is our only answer, forget it. We'd be better off accepting that we'll never have a Utopia, and make sure our economic, social, and political systems are strong enough to deal with the effects of extreme climate, both natural and man-made. Perhaps this is delusional in its own right, but if you buy into the disaster scenarios painted by many climate scientists, we might as well enjoy the little time we have left. Personally, I don't buy into "catastrophic" global warming, but if you do, don't tell me it's easy to solve the problem.

I'm not sure what the microchip is doing on this list. Sure, it uses less power than tube technology. But when you consider the huge data center builds by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft & etc. to support their web effort and the huge amount of electrical power they consume, the microchip is not exactly good for carbon generation and thus Global Warming (if one believes there is a link).

Perhaps it would be better to toss your computer to the local recycler and forgo further Internet use. That would do a lot more to decrease carbon generation.

That's the best abbreviated list I've seen...just great.
For those of you interested in a "bit" longer list please checkout my "Checklist Toward Zero Carbon"

www.checklisttowardzerocarbon.wordpress.com

Download it. Edit it for your local conditions. Make it your own. Pass it on.

Journalists have warned of climate change for 100 years, but can�t decide weather we face an ice age or warming

Marco,

I think the bicycle would have the greatest impact.Not only for our climate but also our health.I know I'm not the only one who would like to shed some pounds.

Here's my list....

1.Walking/bicycles
2.Actual communities not sprawl(suburbs)
3.Gardens(home grown fruit & vegetables)
4.Clothesline
5.Windmills
6.Toilet paper made from post consumer material only.I'm currently using PC brand.
7.Getting away from such a resource based economy logging,oil etc.

Atmosphere of Venus
Venus has an extremely thick atmosphere, which consists mainly of carbon dioxide and a small amount of nitrogen. The atmospheric mass is 93 times that of Earth's atmosphere while the pressure at the planet's surface is about 92 times that at Earth's surface�a pressure equivalent to that at a depth of nearly 1 kilometer under Earth's oceans. The density at the surface is 65 kg/m� (6.5% that of water).The enormously CO2-rich atmosphere, generates the strongest greenhouse effect in the solar system, creating surface temperatures of over 460 �C.[18] This makes Venus's surface much hotter than Mercury's which has a minimum surface temperature of -220 �C and maximum surface temperature of 420 �C, even though Venus is nearly twice Mercury's distance from the Sun and receives only 25% of Mercury's solar irradiance. AGW is here.
KIPP