ok!!!
1.So you think their is nothing linking the ozon gap over our poles?
2.Has nothing to do with polution on the grand scale we are doing now?
3.So the fumes from our cars, trailers and inustry, are not toxic in any shape or form?
Good luck disproving me and thies are my medium hard ones I have harder questions for you.
Originally posted by theprotectors1. No.
1.So you think their is nothing linking the ozon gap over our poles?
2.Has nothing to do with polution on the grand scale we are doing now?
3.So the fumes from our cars, trailers and inustry, are not toxic in any shape or form?
2. It has been caculated that if we continue on the same level of pollution that we are on now, the icecaps will melt in about 200 years. Even though that sounds bad for everyone 200 years in the future, the icecaps melting will only raise the level of water by 36 feet.
3. I never said that the fumes aren't toxic. I said that they won't cause global warming. Refer to answer #2.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
1 edit
Originally posted by Acemaster1. Aerosols...
1. No.
2. It has been caculated that if we continue on the same level of pollution that we are on now, the icecaps will melt in about 200 years. Even though that sounds bad for everyone 200 years in the future, the icecaps melting will only raise the level of water by 36 feet.
3. I never said that the fumes aren't toxic. I said that they won't cause global warming. Refer to answer #2.
2. I've heard figures much larger...
+ goodby Bangladesh...
+ Oh and we won't just be continuing on the same levels of CO2 emission, it is growing, each year we are putting more CO2 out than in previous years...
3. CO2, methane...
Originally posted by Bad wolfWhere have you seen these figures?
I've heard figures much larger...
+ Oh and we won't just be continuing on the same levels of CO2 emission, it is growing, each year we are putting more CO2 out than in previous years...
3. CO2, methane...[/b]
CO2 levels may be rising, but we should look at this as a blessing. It won't hurt us as much as it will help us. Higher CO2 levels mean better plant life. As for methane, that doesn't hurt the enviroment. The New Zealand governmnent's economy was crashing, so they needed something more than just cars to tax. So they started taxing cow farts. (I'm not joking! They really did!)
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
1 edit
Originally posted by AcemasterHere is something I have written in the past on these forums
Where have you seen these figures?
CO2 levels may be rising, but we should look at this as a blessing. It won't hurt us as much as it will help us. Higher CO2 levels mean better plant life. As for methane, that doesn't hurt the enviroment. The New Zealand governmnent's economy was crashing, so they needed something more than just cars to tax. So they started taxing cow farts. (I'm not joking! They really did!)
But it will warm less, that's what I'm getting at, the earth will warm less than what it would if we did nothing to reduce CO2 emissions.
You see because of the CO2 emissions we have already dumped in the atmosphere we have already committed oursleves to some warming, and the related affects.
But at the higher temperatures there will be comparably much more damage done than done by lower increases in temperature.
Consider the idea that moderate warming would damage crop yields in places like Africa, but increase them in places in Canada.
But increasingly higher temperatures will have increasingly damaging affects on Africa, as well as places further north like Canada.
You see crop yields depend on the temperatures.
Think of it like a hill: you walk up the hill, increasing in temperature, but also in crop yield - you reach the optimum temperature at the top.
You continue walking, down the hill, the temperature continues to increase, but crop yields are falling, you have gone beyond the optimum temperatures for your crops and so your crop yields suffer.
You can also think of it like a rainbow.
This is why the higher temperatures global warming would cause (if we do nothing) is such a bad thing.
Take from this what you can
There is a carbon fertilisation affect, where plants will gain from this. But with the damaging higher temperatures the overall gain from this will eventually be negative, especially at the higher temperatures.
Methane is 40 times more affective at trapping heat compared to CO2, 40 times more affective! Do you understand why this is then also a problem then?