nasa
0
hubble
|
Ch. 1 SCIENTIFIC PREDICTIONS & Global Warming HURRICANE Forecasts SEA LEVEL & The Seven Metre Surge Ch.2 GLOBAL WARMING and COOLING The Greenland Ice Cap The Vostok Ice Core Ch. 4 CLIMATE CHANGE Fact or Fancy Ch. 5 GLOBAL DOOMSDAY Beyond CO² The Population Explosion
Your Comments are Invited comment @globalwarming-eh.ca Ch. 1 SCIENTIFIC PREDICTIONS & Global Warming HURRICANE Forecasts SEA LEVEL & The Seven Metre Surge Ch.2 GLOBAL WARMING and COOLING The Greenland Ice Cap The Vostok Ice Core Ch. 4 CLIMATE CHANGE Fact or Fancy Ch. 5 GLOBAL DOOMSDAY Beyond CO² The Population Explosion
Your Comments are Invited comment @globalwarming-eh.ca |
Ch. 3 CO²... Pollutant or Life Support? o Ominous warnings about disastrous Global Warming have now replaced the similarly ominous threats of catastrophic Global Cooling that prevailed in the 1970s, but which have, as yet, failed to materialize. In the currently popular Global Warming scenario, man-made Carbon Dioxide is the greenhouse gas being primarily blamed for the predicted horrors, but we're seldom reminded that the greenhouse effect is what keeps us warm. It does that by absorbing the long-wave reflection of solar radiation from Earth's surface, and converting it to heat in the atmosphere. Without greenhouse gases, life on Earth would become extinct, and Earth would become a replica of Mars. But CO², is not the only gas that contributes to the greenhouse effect. Others include methane, nitrous oxide, and most of all, water vapor. Time magazine reported in April 2007, that there were 1.5 billion cattle and buffalo on Earth, plus 1.7 billion sheep and goats, all producing nitrous oxide from manure and methane from digestive processes. The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization has reported that 18% of all greenhouse gases are generated by the meat industtry. Irrespective ot that, worldwide initiatives are under way to attack the perceived problem of Carbon Dioxide (CO²). But those efforts largely ignore the fact that this ubiquitous gas is not a contaminant in the atmosphere. It is a natural component part of air and is a vital participant in the life cycle. Vegetation feeds on CO² and produces Oxygen. We, along with other animal life, feed on Oxygen and exhale Carbon Dioxide, and as our numbers grow, we naturally exhale more. There are now five times more of us than in the depression years of the 1930s, so the increase in human production of CO² should not be surprising. In addition to breathing, we create CO² through a wide variety of day to day activities. We drive motor vehicles. We burn fuel for warmth and power in our homes and factories. Even the mundane process of baking bread or biscuits, releases CO² from the reaction of the yeast or baking soda used. But huge amounts are also generated by some of Earth's natural functions, and likewise, huge amounts are consumed and absorbed by natural processes. For hundreds of thousands of years before humans appeared on Earth, nature maintained a fluctuating relationship between the production and absorption of CO². As revealed in the Vostok ice core, the concentration of CO² in the atmosphere ranged up and down from a low of about 190 parts per million (ppm) to a high of 300 ppm or more. That amounts to a concentration that has varied from about 0.019% to 0.03% . Oxygen, by comparison makes up 21% of the air, and Nitrogen, 78%. Trace amounts of other gasses account for the less-than the 1% remaining. For many recent centuries of human habitation, CO² held steady at about 280ppm. But around 1880 AD, the level began to creep up slowly. While rising and falling successively in the 130 years since, the general trend at this time is upward. No doubt, human activity makes a contribution to this current trend. It is certainly one of the factors in carbon dioxide production. Burning fossil fuels to generate electricity in the USA produced about 2.3 million tons of CO² in 1999, but that number pales in comparison to the 130 million tons spewed into the atmosphere each year by volcanoes. It is hard to mentally reconcile the tiny percentage of CO² in the air with the enormous tonnage referred to regularly in the media and by the environmentalist community. One can visualize a ton of coal because it has volume and visible dimension; just as ten pounds of water fills an Imperial gallon. But it is just as difficult to grasp the concept of a ton of CO² as it is to grasp the gas itself.. Perhaps a ton of CO² is a mathematical construct, based on molecular weight, but it is puzzling how a quantity of gas, floating freely in the atmosphere can be expressed in tons, a unit of measure which is a product of gravity. An imperial gallon of water weighs ten pounds at sea level, but is considerable lighter on a mountaintop. Can the same be said of some volume of CO²? A ton of CO² is an obscure quantity, but the use of 'tons' as a measure of quantity carries a psychological and emotional impact. It evokes an image of an immense amount of CO² and sounds much more terrifying than 'Three One-Hundredths of One Percent (0.03%)' or "380 parts per million." For climate-crisis advocates, reference to tons of CO² serves to amplify the fear being instilled in the public and helps reinforce the extreme forecasts of Global Warming, melting polar ice, a huge rise in sea level and dead polar bears. It is tempting to call such extreme projections irrational or irresponsible or misleading or mischievous, or perhaps all four, but if we must continue to quantify CO² by avoirdupois, it is useful to remember that each 'ton' of CO² suspended in the atmosphere at a concentration of 0.03%, is diluted by 67,000 lbs of air; (oxygen, nitrogen etc.). At 385 parts per million (ppm) it is mixed with 999,615 parts of those other gases. Can you picture that? As to the effect of CO² on Earth's climate; In 1975, the concentration of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere was 335 ppm, at which level another ice age was said to be imminent. No one made a movie however, urging extreme steps to overcome Global Cooling by driving up the CO² level. Perhaps nature did that for us. Conversely now, with CO² at 380 ppm, just 13% above the 1975 level, it is being cited as the cause of deadly Global Warming, and extreme measures are being pushed to drive it down. As might be expected, politicians worldwide are positioning themselves vocally on the politically correct side of the ‘Green’ agenda. Governments are catering to environmentalists with lip service and a number of revenue producing initiatives. The simplistic carbon tax idea, which conspicuously offers nothing to reduce CO² emissions, has been largely abandoned in favor of a complex 'cap-and-trade' plan which, in effect, provide a license to generate carbon dioxide for a fee. The 'carbon trading market' that will develop from this is seen as a profit opportunity by many in the financial world, who expect they'll be able to 'game' the system. A direct attempt to actually reduce the amount of CO² in the atmosphere by capturing it, compressing and liquifying it, and then burying it deep in the ground, is widely considered to be too costly, so more simplistic proposals are urged on consumers. These include such trivia as a legislated switch from incandescent light bulbs to more costly spiral fluorescent lamps and a ban on leaf blowers. Restrictions on electric tooth brushes might be next. While we are thus being relentlessly driven to reduce CO² emissions molecule by molecule, and cut energy consumption one erg at a time, legitimate doubts can be cast on the fundamental assumption of Global Warming. Is it real or is it really an illusion?
Please Read On
|