<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="todaycom/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Another Close Encounter</title>
	<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/</link>
	<description>Melding fiction and science in life and on paper</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:52:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://www.today.com/version-2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: flemisa</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2730</link>
		<dc:creator>flemisa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:29:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2730</guid>
		<description>Sure hope they get committed to it soon.  It does seem that more people are paying attention than they were 10 to 20 years ago.  Here's hoping it is under control for your children or, at least, theirs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure hope they get committed to it soon.  It does seem that more people are paying attention than they were 10 to 20 years ago.  Here&#8217;s hoping it is under control for your children or, at least, theirs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: attygnorris</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2729</link>
		<dc:creator>attygnorris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:41:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2729</guid>
		<description>I can only imagine how difficult it is to track something that small in space.

Davida</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can only imagine how difficult it is to track something that small in space.</p>
<p>Davida</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stephanieebarr</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2727</link>
		<dc:creator>stephanieebarr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:45:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2727</guid>
		<description>mpaulin, they have been working with other resources to help get a handle on better ways to measure and characterize the environment.  So far, each have their limitations, but that may be something to be mindful of in the future.

shakespeare, I so hear you.  What amazes me is that, 50 years ago, the pollution pollution (the pollution that was readily visible and everywhere) was muc more pronounced than it is today.  We bitched and moaned about how it was too hard to clean up until we were told:  Clean it.  And then it was cleaned with almost no impact to anyone, ONCE we were committed to it.  Same thing with CFCs.  When we tied the ozone layer degradation to CFCs, people bitched and moaned about how we could never give up CFCs unless we wanted to do away with refrigeration altogether.

And, guess what, we drastically reduced our production of CFCs internationally and almost overnight.  It will take a while before they stop wreacking havoc on the ozone layer (long story and a different blog), but progress was noticeable.  And the impact on most of us?  Did you notice it?

I suspect, once we get committed, we'll find that we can improve our efficiency and reduce our carbon output far less painfully than we ever imagined.  Take, for example, this &lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/science/earth/15solar.html?_r=1&#38;scp=4&#38;sq=solar%20power&#38;st=cse" rel="nofollow"&gt;article in the NYT on Palm Desert&lt;/a&gt; California where people installed expensive solar systems with loans from the city (paid back through property taxes) that turned $1400/month energy bills into $500/YEAR bills.  That's pretty freakin' cool.  And there are several distinct and cost effective improvements in solar technology in the works that could drastically improve that original cost.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>mpaulin, they have been working with other resources to help get a handle on better ways to measure and characterize the environment.  So far, each have their limitations, but that may be something to be mindful of in the future.</p>
<p>shakespeare, I so hear you.  What amazes me is that, 50 years ago, the pollution pollution (the pollution that was readily visible and everywhere) was muc more pronounced than it is today.  We bitched and moaned about how it was too hard to clean up until we were told:  Clean it.  And then it was cleaned with almost no impact to anyone, ONCE we were committed to it.  Same thing with CFCs.  When we tied the ozone layer degradation to CFCs, people bitched and moaned about how we could never give up CFCs unless we wanted to do away with refrigeration altogether.</p>
<p>And, guess what, we drastically reduced our production of CFCs internationally and almost overnight.  It will take a while before they stop wreacking havoc on the ozone layer (long story and a different blog), but progress was noticeable.  And the impact on most of us?  Did you notice it?</p>
<p>I suspect, once we get committed, we&#8217;ll find that we can improve our efficiency and reduce our carbon output far less painfully than we ever imagined.  Take, for example, this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/science/earth/15solar.html?_r=1&amp;scp=4&amp;sq=solar%20power&amp;st=cse" rel="nofollow">article in the NYT on Palm Desert</a> California where people installed expensive solar systems with loans from the city (paid back through property taxes) that turned $1400/month energy bills into $500/YEAR bills.  That&#8217;s pretty freakin&#8217; cool.  And there are several distinct and cost effective improvements in solar technology in the works that could drastically improve that original cost.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shakespeare</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2726</link>
		<dc:creator>shakespeare</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:24:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2726</guid>
		<description>I think the junk's been up there for some time. For decades we trashed the place, disposing of all sorts of crud (not a scientific term, I know) on our way to the moon, etc. Now we're just having to live with what we did... 

Kind of reminds me of the trashing we're doing of our own world a bit lower to the ground. And so many still don't think it's happening. Denial is convenient, but not so helpful when we actually have to live with the damage long-term.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the junk&#8217;s been up there for some time. For decades we trashed the place, disposing of all sorts of crud (not a scientific term, I know) on our way to the moon, etc. Now we&#8217;re just having to live with what we did&#8230; </p>
<p>Kind of reminds me of the trashing we&#8217;re doing of our own world a bit lower to the ground. And so many still don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s happening. Denial is convenient, but not so helpful when we actually have to live with the damage long-term.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mpaulin</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2724</link>
		<dc:creator>mpaulin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:20:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/16/another-close-encounter/#comment-2724</guid>
		<description>This is getting so bad with the all of the junk up there, they may have to place radar installations on orbiting platforms that operate on the principles of the air traffic control system, but use the level of detail that the National Weather Service uses for tracking storms / rain / snow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is getting so bad with the all of the junk up there, they may have to place radar installations on orbiting platforms that operate on the principles of the air traffic control system, but use the level of detail that the National Weather Service uses for tracking storms / rain / snow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


