Here we go again...

[Clog II The Avenger]

A quick solution for reducing CO2 is to remove the catalytic converters from all vehicles. Catalytic converter convert CO1 to CO2. CO1 is toxic in a confined space but non toxic in the open air and is not a greenhouse gas. As well as reducing CO2 fuel consumption would be more efficient because a catalytic converters requires the richer fuel to air mixture.

[DimPrawn]

This whole global warming / climate change thing winds me up.

Whenever there is any discussion about tackling the problems, the motorist is always the one to shoulder the blame.

IF climate change is due to greenhouse gases then bear in mind the main culprits are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and fluorocarbons.

BIG producers of these gases include:

Rice production (bloody foreigners)
Cattle farting and burping (mostly foreigners)
Dirty electricity production (mostly foreigners)
Cutting down and burning trees (mostly foreigners)
Landfill sites and open dumps (mostly foreigners)


Each molecule of methane traps heat 20 times more effectively than a carbon dioxide molecule.

Stop producing fecking rice, landfill sites and cattle burps you stupid foreigners!

[AtW]

Whenever there is any discussion about tackling the problems, the motorist is always the one to shoulder the blame.

That's because the main excuse for not buying diesel engine these days seems to be that they prefer smell of petrol and that diesels are louder, ffs, there should be law that would force people get diesels or stop driving: raise cost of petrol by 50% to stimulate upgrades.

BIG producers of these gases include:

Please supply good references to support your claim - I want to see reliable source giving breakdown of main CO2 producing categories, if you have not got it then stop BStting.

[DimPrawn]

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Climate_C...ouse_Gases.asp

Today's atmosphere contains 32 per cent more carbon dioxide than it did at the start of the industrial era. Levels of methane and carbon dioxide are the highest they have been in nearly half a million years.

The Kyoto Protocol covers six greenhouse gases - carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. Of these six gases, three are of primary concern because they are closely associated to human activities.

Carbon dioxide is the main contributor to climate change, especially through the burning of fossil fuels.


Methane is produced naturally when vegetation is burned, digested or rotted without the presence of oxygen. Large amounts of methane are released by cattle farming, waste dumps, rice farming and the production of oil and gas.


Nitrous oxide, released by chemical fertilizers and burning fossil fuels, has a global warming potential 310 times that of carbon dioxide.


http://www.ace.mmu.ac.uk/eae/Global_...use_Gases.html

Greenhouse gases are naturally found in air. They include carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. They trap heat in the atmosphere and keep the Earth's surface much warmer than it would be if there was no atmosphere. This warming effect is called the natural greenhouse effect. In the last 200 years, the amount of greenhouse gases in the air has been increasing, due to human activities. Mankind has been increasing the amount of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide in the air, and has even been adding completely new greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, like the CFCs, which also destroy the ozone layer.

Carbon dioxide is produced naturally through when animals breathe, when dead plants and animals decay, and during natural forest fires. Mankind produces carbon dioxide when coal, oil and gas (the fossil fuels) are burnt for energy and electricity, and when forests are cut down or burnt to make way for agriculture. Trees help to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by using it to make food (photosynthesis). Plant life in the oceans also uses carbon dioxide. Methane is another major greenhouse gas. It is formed naturally in marshes and bogs when dead plant and animal matter decays, and also by termites. Mankind releases methane by growing rice, farming cattle, burying waste and burning fossil fuels. Nitrous oxide is a greenhouse gas naturally produced by oceans and by lightening strikes, but humans have increased the amount in air by the production of nylon and through using agricultural fertilisers.

[andy]

Isn't the obvious solution is to grow trees on all the empty land which is plenty which will soakup all the co2 or is it too simplistic solution

[BlasterBates]

...aha only the highest they've been for half a million years, so..when the dinosaurs were roaming around in those lucious forests, there was a lot more, hmmm.. so what's the problem, are we frightened the deserts might disappear and get covered in fauna ?

[AtW]

so what's the problem, are we frightened the deserts might disappear and get covered in fauna ?

There is enough to have just one zeitheigst around here..


Dim, I asked specific question - breakdown of activities that contribute most in terms of CO2, which according to your source "Carbon dioxide is the main contributor to climate change, especially through the burning of fossil fuels."

So, give me link showing such breakdown so that we all can see if you BStted or not.

[Bagpuss]

From DPs site...

The debate about whether or not climate change is real is over. Irrefutable evidence from around the word - including extreme weather events, record temperatures, retreating glaciers, and rising sea levels - all point to the fact climate change is happening now and at rates much faster than previously thought.


The overwhelming majority of the world’s top climate scientists agree that human activity is responsible for changing the climate. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is one of the largest bodies of international scientists ever assembled to study a scientific issue, and it has concluded that most of the warming observed during the past 50 years is attributable to human activities. The IPCC's findings have been publicly endorsed by the national academies of science of all G-8 countries, as well as those of China, India and Brazil. The Royal Society of Canada – together with the national academies of fifteen other nations – also issued a joint statement on climate change that stated, in part: "The work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represents the consensus of the international scientific community on climate change science. We recognize IPCC as the world's most reliable source of information on climate change.”

Who are the climate change skeptics?

Despite the international scientific community’s consensus on climate change, a very small band of critics continues to deny that climate change exists or that humans are causing it. Widely known as climate change “skeptics,” these individuals are generally not climate scientists and do not debate the science with the climate scientists directly – for example, by publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Instead, they focus their attention on policy makers, the media and the general public with the goal of delaying action on climate change. These skeptics have well-documented connections with right wing think tanks and public relations firms that have set up industry-funded lobby groups. They have also received significant funding from fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil.


The skeptics have employed a wide range of arguments against taking action on climate change - some of which actually contradict each other:


Climate change is not occurring
The global climate is actually getting colder
The global climate is getting warmer, but not because of human activities
The global climate is getting warmer, in part because of human activities, but this will create greater benefits than costs
The global climate is getting warmer, in part because of human activities, but the impacts are not sufficient to require any policy response

After 15 years of increasingly definitive scientific studies attesting to the reality and significance of global climate change, there has been a noticeable shift in the skeptics' tactics. Most skeptics no longer deny that climate change is happening, but instead argue that the cost of taking action is too high - or even worse, that it is too late to take action. All of these arguments are false and are rejected by the scientific community at large.

One of the reasons why the skeptics have achieved prominence completely out of proportion to their small numbers is that they have exploited the media’s drive for balance in reporting. Journalists are trained to identify one position on any issue, and then seek out a conflicting position, providing both sides with roughly equal attention. Unfortunately, the “balance” of the different views within the media does not always correspond with the actual prevalence of each view within society, and can result in unintended bias. This has been the case with reporting on climate change, and as a result, many people believe that climate change is still being debated when in fact it is not.


To gain an understanding of the level of consensus on climate change, a recent landmark study examined every article on climate change published in peer-reviewed scientific journals over a ten-year period. Of the 928 articles on climate change the authors found, not one of them disagreed with the consensus position that climate change is happening or is human-induced. This analysis confirms that scientists who publish in peer-reviewed literature agree with the IPCC and the scientific community at large.




While some level of debate is useful when looking at major social problems, eventually society needs to move on and actually address the issue. To do nothing about the problem of climate change is akin to letting a fire burn down a building because the precise temperature of the flames is unknown, or to not address the problem of smoking because one or two doctors still claim that it does not cause lung cancer. As the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) acknowledges, a lack of full scientific certainty about some aspects of climate change is not a reason for delaying an immediate response that will, at a reasonable cost, prevent dangerous consequences in the climate system.

[AtW]

DimPrawn is whoring for ExxonMobil, and I claim my £50!

[The Lone Gunman]

So, is the solution to plant billions of trees instead of cutting them down, thus removing the CO2 and then burning methane as a fuel?