how can the human race stop or reverse manmade global warming/cooling caused by burning fossil fuels?
>>714590640
burn jews instead
Time travel
I, milqtoast Mustang Mike, frown upon this thread and all who jerk their wanks.
Rub oil on me
>>714590640
>manmade global warming/cooling
you mean what real men used to call the fucking weather?
you can't faggot, you just dress for it.
>>714590640
It's going to be 100 times harder now that Trump is going to be president.
Coal, baby! Burn, burn, burn! Ching, ching, ching!
You don't.
Working together and leaving the personal interests to solve all or social problems and use our resources to develop sustainable "clean" energy.
>>714590640
We can't. We passed the point of no return around the late 80s / early 90s. Our only hope now is to build our economy as aggressively as possible and use the funds to adapt to the new normal. China is already doing it while the Western world sticks its head in the sand.
>>714590640
Pure fiction. The weather goes through cycles. None of the alarmist predictions have come true. None of the climate trends from the last 40 years fit the model. The world has been warming than it is now in the past few hundred years and colder as well. This is all a statist /Marxist power grab and it depends on ignorant dupes like yourself.
Just wait for the next Ice Age
we get one every 10,000 years and its been nearly 10,000 since the last
By giving hundreds of millions of dollars to developing countries, like Africa, to create alternate energy innovations and solutions.
>>714591398
I see all the shills in Congress (and elsewhere) who are lavishly paid by the oil companies have had the desired effect on you.
Step 1: Stop burning fossil fuels
...
There is no step 2
>>714591398
>The weather goes through cycles
Thank you demonstrating how poorly informed you are on anything related to this topic
>>714590640
We can't. We are doomed.
>>714590640
Not possible. I mean theoretical possible but in real life it is in fact not possible.
>>714590640
It's too late.
We are going to go extinct. Electing Trump is proof of this.
The next 200 years will be the systematic plundering and rape of the Earth and society until you're either eliminated or learn how to become an Exploiter yourself.
AGW is real, but it's not what it's presented to be. CO2 does cause warming, but that warming is logarithmic, not exponential. For each doubling of atmospheric CO2, we will see 1.65 degrees C of warming, eventually. So, with the diminishing returns on warming per PPM of CO2, we will never see runaway global warming. It's not physically possible. Consider this:
>most of the history of Earth had CO2 in the thousands of PPM
>most of the history of Earth was only slightly warmer
>half of the history of Earth had life similar to what we have now
Mammals existed and thrived when there was 3000 PPM of CO2. And we are not capable of creating even these high concentrations of CO2, even if we burned every bit of fossil fuel in existence.
So, can we reverse the warming that we've seen? Sure, by cutting emissions and creating carbon sinks. But there's no reason to. We should focus instead on farm runoff that's killing ocean life in droves, and any types of dangerous emissions that cause epidemic levels of asthma and such. You know, things with proven causal relationships and disastrous results.
>>714590640
they already have working co2 pumps. so just make more of those.
>>714590640
Stop burning hydrocarbons
Carbon scrubbers
>>714592232
This shows how we don't give a shit about our owb extinction.
I hope AI gets developed and spreads life throughout the universe,.
>>714592239
>durr libs r still rong about global warming
faggot
>>714592362
>>714592422
that guy has nothing to do with this thread
stop being a faggot
>>714591398
>>714592399
>durr libs
Who said anything about liberals? Or politics at all? I'm a liberal. I'm just also a scientist.
>>714592489
>>714592533
wedgewood_facepalm.png
>>714591398
Good. Maybe you belong in a gulag.
>>714592232
This, its fact. Its too late, if we turned it around 100 percent completely, right now, NO BS from any countries we MIGHT have a chance. But the way things are going its over no matter what.
>>714590640
nope.
We crossed the non-return-point of carbon dioxyde 3 months ago. currently over 400 parts per million and will not come down. trump can fuck this up as much as he fucking wants now. its already over.
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/world-passes-400-ppm-threshold-permanently-20738
>>714591577
God I hate the liberals in my country
>>714592614
Because you are deliberately contradicting what 99% of science is saying. You are not the expert here, they are, and they have made their recommendations. You are trying to shift the problem to something that has nothing to do with climate change, and you're being a faggot.
>>714592616
why the fuck do you have that shit saved on your computer faggot
>>714592718
Because liberals are totally doing this
faggot
>>714592803
Who cares he's bumping the thread.
>>714592718
Me too bud.
>>714592785
>>714592847
stop posting that guy you autistic faggot fuck
>>714592803
For Travis threads.
>>714592880
fuck you
the liberals in this country at least believe in climate change and are trying to do something about it
It is already too late. Welcome to the holocene.
>>714592939
>>714590640
Why do we want to?
Also the risky, untested means for removing carbon dioxide from our atmosphere will likely be the thing that destroys all life on this planet.
>>714592943
>>714593015
you are an autistic
faggot fuck
rape yourself
>>714593065
>>714593015
faggot
>>714593046
Kek
>>714593040
>driving less cars is too risky
kek
>>714593094
>>714593136
GODDAMMIT STOP SPAMMING THIS THREAD YOU AUTISTIC FAGGOT FUCK
FUCK YOU
>>714593180
do you fap to that shit?
kek
>>714592054
Step 1 kill all the white people (Asians too)
Step 2 with all white people gone, in a few generations the Troglodyte races will have forgotten how to extract, refine and use fossil fuels.
Step 3 Things turn to normal
Step 4 Wait for Ice age
Step 5 With the Harsh environment of an ice age needing Higher Intelligence to plan and survive the people that don't fleet to the equator become white people again.
Step 6 This time don't fanny about trying to uplift them and finish the job of killing the Troggs and jungle people.
Step 7 ???
Step 8 Profit!
>>714593182
Make me
>>714593221
>Step 7 ???
fap hard to Maisie's tight body
>>714593217
>>714593315
so that's a yes
you imagine that fat fuck nuzzling your tiny cock
who knew?
From the fact we're all still alive yeah I'd say we CAN but we won't because there's far too much money in it and almost everyone has a petrol/diesel car, and I don't see them shelling out for a new one when the problem won't affect them in their lifetime.
>>714592975
Kek
>>714593396
>>714590640
white pine absorbs almost 100% of its growth rate in the first 20 years of its life
so if we grow massive forests of white pine
chop them down after 20 years
and bury all the trees in air tight vaults
then replant the forests for another cycle
we will remove carbon from the atmosphere
the only thing we really need to do is calculate the amount of carbon we put into the atmosphere and balance our forests to pull that much out every year
>>714593315
>>714593363
>>714593419
you are so incredibly austic anon
kys
for the love of god
>>714593463
faggot
>>714593519
>>714593479
faggot
>>714593487
>>714593578
>>714593484
>and bury all the trees in air tight vaults
silly goy, them pines sound like a great sauce, we could sell them as green fuel!
>>714592783
>Because you are deliberately contradicting what 99% of science is saying.
Science does not function on consensus. There is no directory of scientists who were asked to submit opinions on AGW. And the studies that claim a 99% consensus are deeply flawed (Cook et al. in particular). There is no Senate of Science. One person can be right while the rest of the world can be wrong. And it has happened many times before.
>You are not the expert here
I am, I work in the field
>they are
Scientists work in specialization, and they tend to defer to the opinions of other scientists when not talking about their own specialization. Which allows educational institutions and politicians to basically determine what the "general scientific opinion" is. It is a bad cycle in any area of science that can be politicized.
>and they have made their recommendations
The IPCC made their recommendations. But they are not a scientific organization-- they are a political organization. And they are wrong.
>You are trying to shift the problem to something that has nothing to do with climate change
No, I'm pointing out the inherent problems in the bullshit narrative about CO2. Guy Callendar's model is still virtually unimproved, which shows that the relationship between CO2 and warming is logarithmic. No other model has made more accurate predictions, and no other model can accurately predict these relationships both far in the past (millions of years) and in the short term future (200 years).
>>714593702
>>714590640
It can't. The threshold for reversibility was that emissions had to peak in 2015 and start going down.
We're fucked.
>>714593484
OR MARIJUANA!
>>714593757
>they are a political organization. And they are wrong.
haha no
you are
science is not saying any of the shit you're posting here
some lib must have schooled your fucking ass
>>714593484
Pine trees need acidic soils that drain freely irrc. Sad part about this is we are killing off more soil through agriculture which means lesd space for trees and yes agriculture.
People always harp on about cutting down trees and co2 emissions but its bollocks. Humanity is going to run out of fertile soil before it runs out of air. No one gives a fuck about soil.
>/late night arb rant
We put fucking solar panels on everyone\s roof to make room on our existing electrical grid for everyone to have a fucking electric car. We stop burning coal and we leave the rest of the fucking oil IN THE FUCKING GROUND!!!
If there were more people trying to make the solar energy reliable we could be saved.
>>714593959
>>714591398
From the same great minds that believe our own President Obama is a Kenyan Muslim.
>>714593757
>>You are not the expert here
>I am, I work in the field
if you are not a climatologist
nobody fucking cares what you're claiming to be
>>714594040
>>714593986
faggot
>>714593901
three problems
>cannabis only absorbs ~60% of its growth rate in atmospheric carbon
>cannabis do not grow to very large weights
>cannabis is generally burnt, which puts most of the carbon it absorbed back into the atmosphere
>>714594112
>>714590640
We can't.
I know that this is supposed to be some joke shit, but real talk: We're super fucked. Like, Earth will be dramatically more hostile to life in 30 years fucked. Like "in 15 years, most marine and about all insect species that exist today will be extinct" fucked.
>>714594155
>>714594211
>>714594084
still being a massive autist
>>714593967
Solar panels only have a efficiency of 16% we need to fix that.
>>714594270
>>714594333
>>714593906
>>they are a political organization
>haha no
>IPCC
>Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
>Intergovernmental Panel
>Intergovernmental
>governmental
Governments are political entities. Panels are organizations. So it follows that the IPCC is a political organization.
>>And they are wrong.
>you are
Really, nice rebuttal of the facts, here. You changed my mind. Really.
>science is not saying any of the shit you're posting here
Science doesn't "say" anything. Why are you treating science as if it's a homogeneous thing, rather than a method? Scientists say things. And many other scientists agree with me. Scientists that work at places like MIT, scientists that have published thousands of peer reviewed studies. You can go read them, instead of just accepting the opinion of the government.
>some lib must have schooled your fucking ass
Again, I am a liberal. And I was schooled by other liberals, primarily. In those circles, no one pretends that there is some consensus on climate change, that it is a done deal. Because they are scientists. It's the educational administration that pretends this, and governments.
About 80% of the world's population lives within 60 miles of a coastline. Although the technology and engineering are difficult, the problems are not insurmountable and the issues can be overcome with a "moonshot" approach.
So two words: Tidal Energy
I don't want to breathe in toxic air caused by human activities. This shouldn't be a hard concept for anyone (even climate change skeptics) to understand.
>>714591002
its always useful to know who the people who are scientifically illiterate are.
unfortunately, while idea of boiling a frog is appealing, the fact the rest of us are stuck in the same pan makes it less appealing to let idiots like yourself auto-darwinate.
>>714593907
>No one gives a fuck about soil.
I do, and I've made this point literally hundreds of times in the past decade. But it's been a waste of time, people are too focused on an issue that is not really a major threat.
https://engineeringdotasudotedu/cnce/
Only a matter of time, this technology, combined with something like a cocolithophore will reduce the current carbon dioxide and fix it to a solid form.
how can the human race stop these dubs
>>714594062
>if you are not a climatologist
there are no climatologists on /b/?
>>714590640
it can't unless it wants to go back to a pre-industrial revolution style of life with no computers or electricity
Whatever foolish things humans may do that will likely cause their extinction, it won't stop the planet, and some new forms of life, from keeping on...
>>714594739
I'm a climatologist. Ask your questions.
>>714590640
>how can the human race stop or reverse manmade global warming/cooling caused by burning fossil fuels?
No such thing.
However, if you're concerned about dumping gigatons of fossil carbon into the only atmosphere we have, then we have carbon-free means available to us.
First and foremost, nuclear energy. There is so much uranium available, the energy resource dwarfs fossil fuels into insignificance. Use Gen-4 closed-fuel-cycle nuclear power plants to drive fischer tropsch conversion plants to transform biomass and hydrogen (cracked from water via thermo-chemical cycles) into all the carbon-neutral liquid hydrocarbons you want.
There, all done.
Simple, if you can get over your irrational fears.
>>714594487
It's not just the government touting human caused climate change. Some of the most influential well known scientists have voiced concerns about human caused climate change. It's not just the burning of fossil fuels either. Deforestation is already causing noticeable changes in micro climates across the world. To deny that humans have had little impact is ignorance.
>>714594874
That's stupid, you assume that you need coal for electricity. Coal is only 31% of America's electric supply. Trump can't change that much because the other shit is just getting cheaper.
>>714593967
where would we get the plastic for our computers then?
>>714594062
>hur dur, you don't have the credentials to have an opinion on this subject
>posts opinion on the subject
>hur dur, any claims you make of any credentials are not believable
>doesn't bother rebutting the argument
So you're both nobody, and you're only capable of shitposting. Got it.
>>714590640
LOL
We could accept the fact that humans do not have that much power over their environment. Seriously, every time I hear about humans being the cause if this, I think about Christians claiming they were the center if their diety's geo centric universe. Guess what!? It was a lot hotter and note oxygenated during dinosaurs. Ice caps melt revealing previous civilizations. Are these all because people drive SUVs or carbon foot prints, or are they because climate change is inevitable and to think we have any major effect on it is down right ludicrous?
>>714591538
>Just wait for the next Ice Age
>we get one every 10,000 years and its been nearly 10,000 since the last
This guy, he gets it.
We're due for some SERIOUS cold in the next few dozen centuries.
>>714595120
Microorganisms faggot, bioplastics.
I think there's hope with scrubbing the atmosphere and tailoring it basically how we want it, trapping co2 in concrete seems very promising
>>714595092
no but all the stuff you use with that lifestyle comes from other stuff to that needs fossil fuels for more than electricity and is just as damaging to the environment
>>714594945
Why doesn't the IPCC share their data with the rest of the scientific community to verify their claims?
That, after all, is how science works. Isn't it?
>>714592239
>we are not capable of creating even these high concentrations of CO2, even if we burned every bit of fossil fuel in existence.
CHALLENGE
ACCEPTED
I think you have no fucking idea how much fossil fuel is out there, anon.
>>714595359
We don't need fossil fuels, there is current research being done with biotechnology attempting to replace petroleum-based products of all sorts.
>>714594945
How fucked are we
Mfw when Im looking for hope where there is none
>>714592715
>We crossed the non-return-point of carbon dioxyde 3 months ago. currently over 400 parts per million and will not come down.
Heh.
Posting on 4-chan and still believing the endless fake news about global warming.
IT'S ALL LIES, BINKY.
>>714595254
yeah except it's not viable at yet
>>714590791
agreed, this will work. It was confirmed by Hitler in the 1940's but the large oil companies didn't want it to ruin there profit margins so they had him assassinated before the world knew about it.
>>714595464
I think you don't have a clue about what yuo're defending. Parroting bullshit is easy.
But you threw down the gauntlet. Enlighten us. With citations/links.
>>714595061
>It's not just the government touting human caused climate change.
True. The media is all about this. And the educational institutions.
>Some of the most influential well known scientists have voiced concerns
And I have personally voiced concern, even about CO2. But I'm not going to pretend we have all the answers, that the "science is settled," and that it has settled against the evidence we can see. There are many misguided scientists, on both sides of the issue.
>To deny that humans have had little impact is ignorance.
Well, I never claimed this. Or that CO2 has caused no climate change. I have only stated that our capacity to change the climate through CO2 has just about been reached due to the (well proven) logarithmic relationship between CO2 and warming. Deforestation will absolutely destroy microclimates. Farm runoff is absolutely destroying our oceans. We do need change, but focusing on CO2 is a waste of time and ultimately incorrect.
>>714590640
ignore it, or deny that it is happening.
>>714594704
But even if we reduce Carbon Dioxide is it enough. What do you say to all the doomsday sayers. That we reached point of no return
>>714594628
Aww look. It's a child that wasn't alive in the 80's and 90's when scientists were 100% sure that fossil fuel burning was going to lead to a global ice age by 2000. So fucking cute. I remember when 2000 was 20 years in the future and death was so so close. I also now remember when 16 years ago came and went with scientists still with their head in who Evers ass is paying for the reports.
>>714593986
I have to say, it's been a while since I've seen a /b/tard doing it right.
WELL TROLLED, FAGGOT
>>714595975
>>714595255
People are too selfish to work with one another for the good of the future of civilization. Most people in developed countries only care about making as much money as possible and don't care about polluting the own air we all breathe as long as they get short term gains.
>>714595643
That yet is within 10 years. The market for sustainable fuels, renewable resources, and means of fixing carbon is still growing. It's not being halted, just slowed. People are realizing that being independent of fossil fuels is a better way to go. The cats out of the bag. Corporations can fight it, but it's here now, getting cheaper, and becoming more and more available.
>>714595464
There is, on this planet, the capacity in fossil fuels to produce 1400 ppm of CO2 (GEA, 2012). That's less than half the maximum the planet has seen while mammals have existed.
>>714594600
Toxic fumes? When I was a kid it was called the air and it was so bad you couldn't see half of the skyscrapers down town. Live for more than two decades before you talk about natural cycles of a 6 or 7 BILLION year old planetary system.
>>714595765
Would you not agree that it's important for us to work on sustainability rather than continue with the norm? At least working on sustainability should imply mitigating the negative effects humans have on our earth.
>>714593967
Wait? Are you saying we should leave the oil in the ground next to our water systems? What kind of evil Republican, corporate scum are you??
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/technology/google-says-it-will-run-entirely-on-renewable-energy-in-2017.html?smid=fb-share
Thought that was interesting.
Google sucks down a LOT of energy. Cool that they've put in the investment to make it all renewable.
>>714596258
Go live in China where the pollution in some major cities is so bad that the locals wear masks outside. Is this the world that you want to live in?
>>714596579
That's cool
>>714593967
>>714593967
>comments like this lead me to believe you actually have NO idea how the current electrical grid works
>>714596525
It's crude oil from decayed organisms in the ground, and not the refined semi synthetic petroleum products we pollute with.
>>714596404
>Would you not agree that it's important for us to work on sustainability rather than continue with the norm?
I absolutely agree. The main issues I see, though, are water, soil, and farming/food. Our oceans are acidifying, and reefs are bleaching, due mostly to farm runoff. Our fresh water is polluted by the same runoff. Our soil is not sustainable due to poor farming techniques and petroleum based fertilizer. It is also destroying the quality of our food and increasing disease.
As far as energy sustainability, there is no such thing with current technology. Solar and wind simply don't have the energy density to sustain our needs. We have exponentially increased out production of "green" energy, but it's market share has still decreased every year. Even in places like Germany. We need to embrace safe versions of nuclear power, and fund/research/implement thorium power. Fusion may never happen, but we should not give up. I would love to see the end of fossil fuel use, but we need viable alternatives to this before it will ever happen.
>>714590640
Man made climate change isn't an issue. If what global warming alarmists said was true (industrial revolution was the beginning of the warming period), the process is irreversible at this point. We are producing exponentially larger amounts of CO2 than in the 1800's, if it caused damage we are too far gone now. Even if we forced all western countries to cut emissions right now, China, India, and the developing world would do it regardless.
Good news is that climate change isn't man made, nor is it an extinction level event. If you refer to pic related, you'll see that the earth has remained within a standard deviation of -2/2 Celsius for the most recent period. We have nothing to worry about.
>>714590640
We're past the point of no return, the earth will push back at us and we will lose most of our race in my opinion.
Get all the assholes like you to wrap their lips around exhaust pipes
>>714595765
as one who is not yet officially a scientist, but one who absolutely respects the scientific method and not "what science says", I think you are the only one in this thread who is making a proper argument. I haven't seen the data for myself, so I'm not going to take what you say at face value, but I'm definitely more inclined to hear you out than the "science says we're all gonna die in 30 years" crowd.
It is pretty ridiculous for people to assume they know what man made effects are going to be on the vast and complex system that is the Earth
Any links to back up data?
>>714590640
we're all fucked there's no point in trying even if all of the united states stopped using fossil fuels it's nothing compared to china and you are not going to get china to stop
>>714597067
Aren't carbon emissions significantly adding to the rise in acidification of the ocean? Last I heard is that our oceans are essentially at the limits of absorbing Co2.
>>714595916
Underrated post
>>714595765
Would you agree that changing the way the American food industry would also help? With the way it is set up, the majority of farmland is just to make food for cattle. Less than 1% is used for plants that we eat. I think that putting regulation on cattle would be very hard, but it could be a step in the right direction.
>>714598025
Also, cows produce a huge amount of methane, which contributes to other climate problems.
The non-PC way = free birth control, abortions, and higher taxes for having kids. Prevent rapes and educate women in 3rd world countries. Sterilize people in developing nations where the population level is too dense. Impose import tariffs and bans on certain products like palm oil. Wipe out ISIS any flattening cities and everyone in them. Discourage motherhood and having babies early in life before you a living a environmentally friendly lifestyle. Reduce the amount of money wasted on pets and military projects and invest in clean energy. Research cold fusion technology more and push it as the best hope. Modernize your home and don't use last century technology in it (LED lights, tankless waterheaters, smart thermostats, HDTVs, more insulation). Bicycle and walk more. Fly less.
>>714597652
Ya, pretty much. Once the calcified animals who will be affected most, Clams, and such it removes part of the necessary link to the oceanic ecosystem.
People also have to accept that GMO is actually a GOOD thing. As the population increases and more and more land is reclaimed we have to be able to increase yields and nutrition of all our produce.
>>714598367
Effecting the whole ocean, it is axiomatic that once our ocean becomes too polluted for diverse life that the whole world will because the ocean is 70 percent of the earth.
The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement vhemt.org
>>714598518
Its a good thing as much as it is a bad thing. Unregulated Genetically modiefied organisms can kill everyone faster than global warming. could be the best or worst thing to happen to mankind.
>>714598521
So if we know that at least carbon emissions are destroying our oceans then we should be trying to mitigate and scrub the pollution.
>>714595715
Anon, really?
Unconventional reserves. This is stuff that totally exists.
It's just expensive and hard to dig up, so it's not counted in reserve allocations.
As fracking is proving, when we need the tech to mine any goddamn thing we want, we'll fucking go mine it.
There are STUPID amounts of fossil fuels, anon.
The total RESOURCE is far larger .
See this .pdf
http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/pdfz/documents/2008/08115scott/ndx_scott.pdf.html
Oh, and uranium? VASTLY larger.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0501111.pdf
>>714598634
We have really no choice. Until we can farm on skyscrapers in cities how else do we produce food sustainably?
>>714598731
Scrub the pollution? Enlighten me
>>714598898
You're right. Im just saying someone is going to create something that is going to destroy us all, probably on accident could be on purpose.
>>714598915
Carbon scrubbing and reducing emissions. People are already working on ways to try and capture the Co2 and store it underground.
>>714599051
Very well could happen. Hopefully we will be living on multiple planets and in space by then.
>>714590640
It's already been done. Dumb ass
>>714599173
Lol, implying they will be able to better run a society on a a pile of dust and ice. The true fact is humanity doesn't deserve to survive if they don't continue to evolve. People are so asleep now its stupid.
>>714591002
what happened to real men anyway? all i see in the world is grown children still relying on mommys hot cakes to get them thru life.
go chop a tree for heat, and come back to this thread when you're done.
>>714599393
Well can't say that you are wrong.
Pro tip: The hole in our ozone has already began to shrink. T
his whole thread is invalid and no one here really knows any facts on this matter.
>>714599082
>>714599082
the problem is the cost and logistics of getting it to a place. I work at a coal fired powered station and we actually have a small pilot carbon capture plant the CSIRO where trailing
they can get the carbon out of the exhaust gasses fairly easily but then you actually have to find somewhere to store it and there really aren't that many places suitable for it and they're normally out in the middle of fucking nowhere. as you have to go down pretty fucking far and has to have a rock shelf roof and all this other shit
the other place they want to look at storing it is in coal mines and fracking (getting methane from under ground) so just pump it in there and box it up
just have to make sure no one goes digging and disturbs it, plus its still probably going to leak out anyway
>>714599630
>>714597481
>Any links to back up data?
I don't really rely on online sources for my data, so no links. I usually use a local database with loaded data. But all of the raw data is published. GISS is particularly interesting, in that it agrees precisely with really early logarithmic models on warming. Unfortunately, we don't have a long enough data set since the satellites have only been up since the late 1970s. But there is no proof of a climate sensitivity that will create runaway warming. We have widely accepted CO2 level data for all of modern history, and at no level or duration have we seen a climate sensitivity that deviated from the logarithmic model proposed by Guy Callendar. I believe a more recent study (this decade, right around the last IPCC report) refined the model to 1.63 degrees C of warming per CO2 doubling, rather than 1.65. But I can't remember who published it off the top of my head.
>Aren't carbon emissions significantly adding to the rise in acidification of the ocean? Last I heard is that our oceans are essentially at the limits of absorbing Co2.
It's a very slow process, so we're not really seeing major differences due to the slowly increasing atmospheric CO2 levels. CO2 disolves more efficient at lower temperatures (close to freezing), under pressure, and with agitation... we don't have two of these at all, and one is minimal, considering the volume we're talking about. So it is an extremely slow process. But farm runoff is an immediate effect. I would attribute the vast majority of the acidification of the oceans to this cause. And there are more coral bleaching events tied to runoff than to atmospheric CO2.
>>714599640
Well perhaps we can figure out a way to change the carbon gasses into a solid state.
>>714599630
Global warming was just proven to be a hoax. Should be big news shortly. Hopefully these retards will shut up now.
>>714590640
Technology.
How can we further technology?
Why, as per usual, capitalism of course.
Capitalism afforded us to walk on the moon, make computers, and amass free porn.
The future is now!
>>714599952
>>714598025
>Would you agree that changing the way the American food industry would also help?
Yes, particularly in industrialized farming and livestock.
> With the way it is set up, the majority of farmland is just to make food for cattle. Less than 1% is used for plants that we eat.
The bigger issue is that they don't coexist anymore. The natural process would be: plants grow -> cattle eat plants -> poop -> bugs eat cow poop -> birds eat bugs -> birds poop -> well fertilized soil -> plants grow. We are completely divorced from that, and we end up with high concentrations of unused/unusable manure and animal byproducts, and resort to using petroleum based fertilizers. Both are destroying the environment.
I have no idea what we can do to regulate this... my expertise is not in policy making. But we do need to return to a more natural cycle for raising/farming food.
>>714599805
It is a fact though that CaCO3 (calcium carbonate) reacts with CO2 and water to create Ca(HCO3)2. I don't know how salt water exactly works in this regard, but I assume turning coral shells into an aqueous soup with increased CO2 is contributing to the problem on some significant scale.
>>714598150
>huge amount of methane
This is true, and is a much bigger problem than CO2 ever was. but as far as the math goes, I don't see any catastrophic events happening based on our current output. We could even use cattle as an energy source, which would be much cleaner overall... but only if we maintained out industrial food production techniques, which I do not endorse.
>>714599881
>>714599881
we can already do this... but how much energy do you have to use to turn it into a solid state??
so your literally burning more coal, to make electricty to suck the carbon out of a power stations exhaust gases to turn it into a solid state
>does not compute
>>714600900
Hydroelectric bro
>>714601055
>Hydroelectric
>>714600590
>increased CO2 is contributing to the problem on some significant scale.
It depends on what you mean by significant? Atmospheric CO2 has caused bleaching events throughout history, but they have always relied on many other factors as well. Coral existed and thrived when atmospheric CO2 was in the thousands of PPM, so on its own, CO2 is not the issue. A higher CO2 level, interacting with many other factors, does increase the possibility of bleaching events. But not in a way that I would describe as significant.
Farm runoff creates far more issues, with far more frequency. And these issues are not something that can be attributed to (mostly) natural cycles.
>>714596188
>There is, on this planet, the capacity in fossil fuels to produce 1400 ppm of CO2 (GEA, 2012). That's less than half the maximum the planet has seen while mammals have existed.
You've been reading Hanson's bullshit articles.
The man is a huge iar and an utter hack. Disbelieve.
From the GEA 2012 report:
http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/research/Flagship-Projects/Global-Energy-Assessment/GEA_Chapter7_resources_hires.pdf
Page 431, and read the footnotes.
Even these eco-wacky schlubs admit that there are thousands upon thousands of years of fossil fuels in the ground.
Note thaey don't even provide an estimate of unconventional coal resources, the pussies. But it's easy to estimate.
Nat gas is roughly proportional to coal beds.
Conventional gas resource is about 8000 exajoules Unconventional is about 1,080,000 exajoules
Conventional coal resource is about 400,000 exajoules, or 50 times larger. (Yes, this is true.) So, additional occurrence should be on the order of 1,080,000/8000 = 135 times as great, or, 54 million exajoules.
Do I need to explain how stupidly much fossil fuel is in the world in even smaller words?
Ask china
>>714601419
What particular farming chemicals? Also CO2 more readily dissolves in colder conditions? Strange considering how most chemical reactions I've dealt with tend to react more quickly at higher temperature levels
>>714590791
Krispy Fried Kraut Children burn so much better! Nothing like dead nazi children in the hearth to warm the room!
9,000,000 dead krauts and now Germany is cucked into oblivion. Meanwhile, Jews are more powerful than ever!
We win, you lose, cuntface.
>>714602189
>You've been reading Hanson's bullshit articles.
No, I read the GEA, as I cited. I know there are thousands of years of fossil fuels left, even at our exponentially increasing rate of use.
>Do I need to explain how stupidly much fossil fuel is in the world in even smaller words?
Nope, I get it. But even with all that fossil fuel, with our current usage rates, and over the thousands of years it would take to burn, we would only ever hit 1400 PPM or CO2. Enough to raise the temperature another 3.2 degrees C, disregarding any non-atmospheric and non-climate-sensitivity effects that might lower CO2 levels or lower the temperature by other means (solar cycles, etc.).
