General discussion

Locked

So, not only are CO2 emissions actually contributing to climate change

By AnsuGisalas ·
Tags: Off Topic
And yes they really are...
But again, not only are they doing that, they're also increasing the acidity of the seas ... CO2 in aqueous dilution is H2CO3 : carbonic acid, like in your soda. Remember that scare experiment they showed you back in the day, where they left a milk tooth in a glass of soda overnight, and it was just gone the next day?
Turns out, same thing happens to the shells of many food-chain-starters in the seas. Entire food chains of marine life can be devastated.
Historically, when the oceans tank, they tank hard. It is well documented that marine mass extinctions can kill off almost all marine life, and have done so several times in the past.

But you know, if it's happened in the past with no human contribution, obviously we can find lots of reasons not to do anything about it now...

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

84 total posts (Page 3 of 9)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Breathing is carbon neutral

by neilb@uk In reply to I suggest you look up som ...

We eat stuff, convert it to CO2, breathe it out, plants convert it to stuff, we eat stuff...

Collapse -

I know you have

by aidemzo_adanac In reply to I suggest you look up som ...

If you haven't paid attention and clued in to me yet, I've been around these forums for well over a decade now. I have read your past comments and wholly agree with many of your views on the matter. The comment I had replied to may have been my own lack of comprehension but it just came across as if you were dismissing the concept because volcanoes do more damage than humans. Not to be corrective but also not to ignore the real issue, as SO MANY politicians do. It's not all about Co2 emissions either. Co2 is not the be all end all of global warming. Co2 is simply one of thousands of harmful gases that contribute to the problem. Politicians like to focus their junk science on Co2 emissions and make it a focus because it is such a harmless gas in most cases, that its very easy to downplay the significant effects on the amosphere.
The one I'm most aware of and most concerned about personally, is CO. Carbon Monoxide is literally deadly to us. It is also the #1 most dangerous vehicle emission, which AirCare centres are most focused on testing for. With new cars emitting such low CO emissions, they are actually doing away with AirCare here for passenger vehicles as of next fall (FINALL!Y!!!). Unforutnately that takes SOME money out of my pocket too, nothing unmanageable though. Politicians and political scientists are a farce, lets replace POLITICIAN with 'Liar' and you get "Liars and Liar's scientists", which is MUCH more fitting.

In Canada, we really do have a luxury of being exposed to REAL science and REAL global issues from a very young age. Schools promote science in a big way, there is little to no focus on politics or religion but a massive focus on science.

Unfortunately, Canada, as a nation, sits at the very bottom of the list when it comes to our activity to reduce or stop greenhouse emissions and reducing our carbon footprint. In fact, we are merely a tiny step above Kazakhstan, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. This I find embarrassing as we are a nation so proud of its natural beauty, which people travel from all around the work to enjoy. We can do more and we MUST do more, we can do better and we MUST do better, it is something we must take responsibility for as individuals. The poblem is, people DON'T take responsibility as they just look at someone else and say how much worse they are...as always in today's most pathetic excuse for society. Nobody is willing to accept personal responsibility and thus nothing gets done. If the government steps in with some ridiculous solution and mandates action, then those same people get all ruffled and *****, while those who ARE actively doing their part, are imposed upon even more.

So, forgive me if I misunderstood your comment, it certainly seemed as though you pointed a finger and concluded, 'we have nothing to worry about, compared to the effects volcanoes have'.

Collapse -

Winters and paper industry are a bitches, aren't they?

by AnsuGisalas In reply to I know you have

Finland has the same exact problem. Even though most of the power is low-impact hydro (no massive dams or anything), getting to carbon neutral is fekking hard when it's pitch dark and shilt cold for 5 months of the year.
Paper industry, long as it lasts, has very bad carbon figures. Of course, it would be fair to make the end destination of that paper pick up the carbon tab, but Finland is on such a moral high horse that they can't bring themselves to argue strongly for the mitigation of the treaties.

Collapse -

Mount Saint Helens

by neilb@uk In reply to Most likely they, like me ...

Oh, dear. You're at it again.

You know, it's an absolutely trivial task to read a few (proper, scholarly, peer-reviewed) papers on the gaseous emissions from the Mt St Helens eruption and compare that to the anthropogenic CO2 production.

What it does is save you from looking like a complete muppet.

I'd really appreciate it if you would STOP posting completely erroneous information in such a pedagogic fashion and then I wouldn't have to post in return.

Collapse -

I have read a lot of papers by the volcanologists about emissions from

by Deadly Ernest In reply to Mount Saint Helens

volcanoes both during passive periods and eruptions, and seen some of their estimates about the crap thrown out at Mount St Helens, Krakatoa, Pinatubo, Tambora, etc and the emissions like sulphur dioxide, carbon dioxide, etc they put out plus the more solid material and what it does to the area. They measure most of the stuff in millions or billions of tonnes of each type of material thrown out.

Pinatubo put out over 20 million tonnes of CO2 in it's June 1991 eruption, how long does it take humans to produce that amount of CO2?

Sorry mate, but the facts from the real experts support me, not you or the BS put out by the politicians and some faux scientists.

Collapse -

Just under six hours

by neilb@uk In reply to I have read a lot of pape ...

if your value of 20MT is true, but it isn't. Estimates for the Pinatubo eruption are in the area of 0.04 to 0.05 GTonnes of CO2. Twice your estimate. Pinatubo was a VEI-6. I produce more CO2 in explosive dumps after a vindaloo curry.

Humans produced well in excess of 30 GTonnes per annum CO2 in 2010. That's a factor of 700.

Let's see if we can help your confusion! Pinatubo produced 40-50 MILLION tonnes of CO2 during the eruption. Humans produce over 30 BILLION tonnes of CO2 per annum.

I'm not an expert but I was a scientist, so I check multiple sources and estimate the provenance, consistency and authority of the data. And then I read it - properly - and then I draw my own conclusions.

Even VEI-7 eruptions like Krakatoa and Tambora, which occur one in a century, will only generate 0.1GTonnes. That's 100 MILLION.

If we get a VEI-8 then we'll probably get a measurable CO2 increase in the atmosphere but CO2 will be the least of our worries.

Suck it up.

You know, I did originally say a week but I forgot what units I was working in... Goes to show that you really should check everything and trust no-one.

Collapse -

A VEI-8?

by NickNielsen In reply to Just under six hours

If it happens while I'm alive, I hope it's Yellowstone and not Toba. After one of those, I'd rather go fairly quickly than hang around and slowly waste away.

Collapse -

Yellowstone WILL explode ......

by maxwell edison In reply to A VEI-8?

..... in 10,000 years, give or take a few thousand. Plan accordingly; everyone should see Yellowstone at least once.

Collapse -

Yellowstone will explode

by neilb@uk In reply to A VEI-8?

Could go tomorrow!

BBC made a reasonable docudrama about a full-on Yellowstone eruption set in the near future - Supervolcano. Interestingly, Mexico closed the boder stopping US refugees. You can pick it up on Youtube. The first eruption cuts loose in Part 4.

Collapse -

Max. re: Yellowstone WILL explode

by aidemzo_adanac In reply to A VEI-8?

10,00 years or 10,000 minutes wouldn't make any difference. There's no problem, world ends in a few weeks anyway. Why not all just crack a beer and fugettabowdit !

Back to After Hours Forum
84 total posts (Page 3 of 9)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums