Anthropogenic Global Warming - Does More Need To Be Done?

Our environment minister is by far one of the worst.

Actually China emits the most CO2, and I believe they were not even asked to join. On that fact I could be wrong.

Another problem, where do we put all that Nuclear Waste? I'm sure the environmentalists would have something to bitch about. Although environmentalists can be some of the most annoying people ever.

Build coal/oil plants -> your killing the Ozone Layer
Build solar plants/wind plants -> your wiping out huge sections of land to make them.
Build hydro-electric plants -> your damming up rivers and destroying their ecosystems.
Build nuclear plants -> your creating a ton of Nuclear Waste that will be a constant problem.
Build anything else -> that's so expensive. How could we afford that?

Fuck, what do they want from us?

I believe they did "join", but were given an exception because they were a 'Developing Nation'. Same for India.

Well I like the German way of storing it in big takes very far underground.

What are you talking about, environmentalists are huge proponents of solar and wind power.

Well people's who's land they out it on say that.

The problem with that is that if the tank should break it would leak into the water table, and that is obviously a bad thing.

Yeah, but you do hear about it every once in a while.

Make a thick concrete casing around the nuclear waste storage facility, build it underground, and away from aquifers. Always make sure there is a failsafe for the thing to incase of leakage.

What about Nuclear fusion, because you know fission energy just doesn't get as much.

I actually think they are far enough underground they won't do anything. Even then there would also be a lot safety measures in place.

Throw it all in the Gobi desert.

Those that are don't realize the amount of land that would have to be paved over in concert for the Solar Panels to be built. I'm sure if we did actually plow over the Mojave/Sonora Deserts for them (even then that's hardly anything), they'd bitch about it.

China did join.

Fun fact on Chinese fighting pollution: The Bejing sky is recorded to have a red tinge during sunup and sundown for centuries and has been a prominent part of the culture of the city. The reason for this is the pollution that has been a part of the city for that timespan. Recently [by Chinese standards] the CPC government officials became concerned about this [undoubtedly more for their own health than others'] and passed a law that established even-odd days. This act restricted driving in the city based on the lisence plate ending in either even or odd numbers. Because of this, those with even numbers could only drive on even days and those with odd numbers could only drive on odd days. Most of these, particularly the Bejing one, were only temporary.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010-12/29/content_11768648.htm
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12866136
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/21/world/asia/21china.html

Also, I might note that China has the largest solar producer in the world based in it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suntech_Power

it's still one of the most polluted countries in the world.

Well it does have like a 1/7th of the World's population.

As Kara said, it DOES HAVE 1/7th the world's population.
Dismissing their progress by saying that they are one of the most polluted countries, true or not, is not good reasoning. Compared to many other countries, even in the West, China is moving towards cleaner energy at a lightning-fast pace.

Build solar panels in the Sahara, problem

There will always be some people who bitch at you for whatever you do. That is no reason not to go ahead with any of those ideas though.

Nuclear power is mainly proposed because it'll take quite a while before the resources run out, giving us time to research and develop other means of gaining power. I think Iceland is being powered by purely clean power (mainly water power, which actually created an ecosystem by making several lakes instead of destroying it) right now, but then again, their terrain and low demand give them those opportunities.
Also, storing nuclear waste underground in concrete bunkers with copper casing will stop a lot, if not all radiation that could leak from it. Heck, pumping out oil and gas leaves a lot of holes in the ground, might as well use them.
Germany did close up all nuclear facilities after the disasters in Japan, because you know, Germany is always endangered by 9.0 earthquakes and tsunamis that will threaten their outdated facilities...oh, wait.

But really, all countries should individually use their terrain to their advantage. The US has a lot of flat land where there's a lot of sun and wind (although these stupid turbines can't ever start because it's either too windy or not windy enough) which they can use, countries like Switzerland and Austria already have some dams, and coastal countries can invest in tidal energy technologies. Other countries with large, open, flat and risk-free spaces can easily plant down nuclear facilities without any problems. If you look at the disasters that have happened, most come down to outdated facilities (in combination with one of the worst natural disasters to have happened in recent history, mind you) or human errors (I don't know about the one in the US, though, wasn't there one in the middle of nowhere that blew up?).

As for fuel, for now, bio diesel and hydrogen seem to be the best candidates. Electric cars that exist right now still aren't very efficient and have a low action radius compared to traditional petrol cars. Not to mention companies are reluctant to invest in those technologies as right now, they won't be able to sell any hydrogen, as noone has a car that run on it. It's a vicious circle, that should be broken as soon as possible.

The thing with solar energy is that they are expensive and don't produce a lot of energy, especially depending on the weather. Wind energy purely depends on elevation and wind speeds.