Global warming, CO2 emissions and Calcium reactor

[Rossini]

. It doesn't help that we're chopping down lots of forests at the same time.

I was watching a wildlife documentary the other night,and some US government official was claiming that the whole rainforests are being destroyed issue is a myth and that the "greens" have been talking about this issue for ages,yet the forests are still there.

What an arsehole he is! 80% of the worlds tropical forests have been destroyed,and the rest will go within the next 15/20 years. It's a FACT. :mad2:

 

[jamielind]

I cant believe you're american! You speak so much sense concerning global warming.

Even your dumb *** cowboy president is saying you should start to cut emmisions now.

I feel it will all be to little to late though.

When will our world leaders start LEADING us into a brighter future?! Maybe never.....
To date (October 2006), there is no legislative framework in place within the UK to guarantee year-on-year reductions in emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouses gases. To date, some 413 Members of Parliament, or around two-thirds of the total, have signed Early Day Motion 178[31] calling for the introduction of a Climate Change Bill that will address this issue, making a proposed 3% annual cut in carbon dioxide emissions legally binding. Despite a strong lobby from environmental organisations, such as Friends of the Earth's Big Ask Climate Campaign[32] and wide cross-party support, the Bill failed to pass its second reading.[33] However, the Government looks set to include a Climate Change Bill in the Queen's opening speech to Parliament in November, but is expected to ignore intense pressure from its own and opposition parties, and from environmental groups to include the annual 3% reduction commitment in the Bill.[34]

The UK currently appears on course to meet its Kyoto target for the basket of greenhouse gases, assuming the Government is able to curb rising carbon dioxide emissions between now (2006) and the period 2008-2012.[35] However, annual net carbon dioxide emission levels in the UK have actually risen by around 2 per cent since Tony Blair's Labour Party came to power in 1997.[35] Furthermore, it now seems highly unlikely that the Government will be able to honour its manifesto pledge to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 20 per cent from 1990 levels by the year 2010,[35] unless a Climate Change Act is passed in 2006-7 and the Government takes immediate and drastic action to curb emissions over the next few years.

sounds typical blame everyone else but yourselves.
take down your tank and live in grass hut for a few years then tell me about what i should change in my life

 

[virginiadiver69]

well I guess the race is on! Will it be global warming or no forest in 20 years.

Why is it always 20 years anyway? In the early 80's we were going to under ice in 20 years. Now in 20 years we will be under water, and just to add insult to injury we won't have any forest.

 

[Rossini]

I'm blaming everyone! Especially Blair! All he does is talk the talk.

I just cant belive how many people still say that global warming is not a man made thing! Its been PROVEN by many many different scientists. the only people who say its not are people being paid by exxon and other oil firms.

 

[jamielind]

i guess the only way to stop this is sterilization to prevent population growth. please will all the believers be first in line.

 

[jamielind]

might solve alot more than global warming

 

[virginiadiver69]

Rossini, I will ask you the same question. What do YOU do on a regular daily basis to cut your Co2 emissions?

 

[Rossini]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9180700#post9180700 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by virginiadiver69
Rossini, I will ask you the same question. What do YOU do on a regular daily basis to cut your Co2 emissions?

I drive a 1100cc vehichle,although I would love to get an electric car,hopefully will soon. I recycle all my rubbish. I offset my carbon emmisions by donating money to green projects worldwide, when I fly to abroard,"once" a year. I have energy efficient light bulbs.I make sure everything is turned off at the mains,and leave nothing on that is not in use. My house has been re-insulated,to help with heat loss,and better energy usage. I am trying to get my dad to convert his lorrys for his haulage business into using bio-fuel. But our sh*tty government doesnt make it very accsessable to get bio fuel. So its hard.

I know this isnt alot. But if everyone was realise what a state our planet is in. And to ditch the gas guzzling vehichles,and make a some changes it all helps.And once one group of people start,more will follow.

Of all the big things governments can do is decentralise energy production. two thirds of the energy produced in coal and gas fired power stations is wasted. Holland and Denmark use this alot,and with great results. A town in the south of england,Woking has decentralised its energy and has cut co2 emmisions by 80%! We are using old virtually ancient inefficient power stations from the decades ago,we need to re-invest in decentralised and sustainable energy production. but our d*ck of a prime minster just wants to make more power stations,and nuclear ones too. which im completley against. our leaders are leading us into oblivion.

 

[Rossini]

I also proudly donate money to WWF and Greenpeace.

Out of interest do you do anything?

 

[unclereefer]

Hey Rossini, namecalling is just a little childish don't you think? I think that President Bush's main concern is reducing dependance on foriegn oil, and rightly so. It's frustrating that American oil companies have been blocked by environmentalists every time they try to recover America's oil (Gulf of Mexico, ANWR.), but it doesn't reduce consumption one bit. We just buy our oil from people that want to kill us. The environmentalists have been pushing ethanol use and i think it will help with reducing our dependance on foriegn oil, but will it help stop global warming? I know that ethanol burns cleaner than gasoline but what about the manufacturing process? I found this information at www.ethanol.org.

8. Co-Products. There are two main co-products created in the production of ethanol: distillers grain and carbon dioxide. Distillers grain, used wet or dry, is a highly nutritious livestock feed. Carbon dioxide is given off in great quantities during fermentation and many ethanol plants collect, compress, and sell it for use in other industries.

So, the ethanol plant just sells the co2 for someone else to use? How effective will that be? Secondly, can you imagine the increase in corn farming it will require to meet the demands of the consumers? According the the new report on GW, http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf, the increase in methane and nitrous oxide are due primarily to the increase in agriculture.

"Global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have increased
markedly as a result of human activities since 1750 and now far exceed pre-industrial values
determined from ice cores spanning many thousands of years (see Figure SPM-1). The global increases
in carbon dioxide concentration are due primarily to fossil fuel use and land-use change, while those of
methane and nitrous oxide are primarily due to agriculture. {2.3, 6.4, 7.3}"

I have also heard some theories on how it will effect third world, and South American areas that rely upon corn as a large part of thier diet.
So IMO, in the environmentalists' struggle to ban any oil recovery in America, we must look at alternatives like ethanol (which they have been pushing for years) and in turn may end up causing more problems than we began with, especially if you believe that we are causing global warming. I'm not an expert, but doesn't it all seem a little contradicting?

 

[unclereefer]

BTW Rossini, you should really watch that potty mouth.

 

[Rossini]

Your presidet is an ar*se, lets face it. He has caused your country alot of trouble. How many billions or trillions has he spent on the war and illegal occupation of iraq? maybe he should spend your countrys money a little better dont you think?

He has no intention of sitting down with other countrys to solve a massive global problem he just carrys on like the arragant arse he is. I dont think any better of our prime minster Georges lap dog,Blair.


I dont think Ethanol is a long term solution either.Surely we would have to convert masses of land to grow corn or whatever is needed,and im sure that wouldnt be very good envronmentally or even possible. I dont have any answers. thats why I want countrys with experts to sit down and try and sort something out,instead of carrying on regardless. It's madness!

 

[unclereefer]

Your funny man, "illegal occupation". You sound very angry, I think you need a hug, and a lesson in appropriate language.

 

[Rossini]

I am quite angry yes.Im also very passionate about envronmental issues. Dont worry my gorgeous girl will give me all the hugs I need tonight when I get in from work.

 

[useskaforevil]

recycling is bad for the enviroment. the only thign worthwhile is aluminum cans. anythign else requires toxic chemicals to really be reused for any industry. if you reuse soemthign yoruself that is helping, but not really enough to do anything but make you feel superior. why does anyone still think CO2 is a "greenhouse gas" ? i simply do not understand the logic or science behind it. there is no convection, just re-radiation. check out www.junkscience.com

 

[virginiadiver69]

Rossini, you offset your carbon emissions? What does that mean? That's like saying I cheat on my wife but I buy her a fur coat on Christmas.
Why are you against nuclear power? It is the one real alternative out there.
As far as bio fuel goes. Make you own. It's a fairly simple process.

Oh, and by the way. I don't do anything to conserve. I don't recycle, I leave lights on in rooms that I am not in, I kill kittens, I drive a ten(10) cylinder SUV, I clear cut 5 acres of maple forest so I could build my house and last but not least...I have a 125 gal salt water aquarium that is lighted, heated and circulated 24 hrs a day.

 

[HippieSmell]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9180982#post9180982 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by unclereefer
8. Co-Products. There are two main co-products created in the production of ethanol: distillers grain and carbon dioxide. Distillers grain, used wet or dry, is a highly nutritious livestock feed. Carbon dioxide is given off in great quantities during fermentation and many ethanol plants collect, compress, and sell it for use in other industries.

I'm not convinced that ethanol is the answer to all of our problems either, but this question I can answer. Since corn is a plant, it takes all of it's CO2 from the air. When it releases CO2 during fermentation or the combusting of ethanol, it's only releasing into the atmosphere what it has taken out of it. It's called being carbon neutral, if you've heard that term before. The fertilization of corn is a problem though.

 

[virginiadiver69]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9180499#post9180499 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by virginiadiver69

If you can come down out of your ivory tower for a moment, would you please enlighten all of us Neandrothols what YOU do on a daily, regular basis to lesson Co2 emissions?

HIPPIESMELL how about you? Have you calculated how much electricity you use running your tank. How much jet fuel is used to fly the rocks in your tank in from Fiji?

I've started a pole. Let's here what you do to "save the planet"

 

[jamielind]

since coal and oil used to be plant they must be carbon neutral too huh?

 

[HippieSmell]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9179503#post9179503 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SpektralerSpeer
What gets me is when people are ridiculed, isolated or even attacked just for asking questions. The sort of 'gang mentality' we see when someone comes up with an original idea that threatens the consensus has absolutely no place in science. I get very suspicious when we see people being repressed for asking questions. It makes me think there is much more to it than what we're told. Perhaps we'll soon have a law forbidding 'global warming denial'. It would fit in quite nicely with the current trend to restrict our freedom.

Paul

Who's being ganged up on and suppressed? In the US, scientists at NASA were silenced by the Whitehouse when they wanted to show evidence of GW, and the EPA was compromised by the Whitehouse when their documents supporting GW were allowed to be altered by a former oil lobbyist. Maybe things are different in Germany, but the US still has some very strong opposition to GW left in it.