Posted on 06/12/2015 8:14:37 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
When fossil fuels -- coal, oil and natural gas -- burn, the major combustion products are carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor. Water doesn’t matter since it is already everywhere and adding a little bit more to the Earth won’t tip any balances. CO2, on the other hand is considered to be a great evil by those who believe in catastrophic global warming.
It’s perfectly reasonable that adding CO2 to the atmosphere could cause some warming, probably minor. This perfectly reasonably supposition was turned into unreasonable dogma by certain scientific disciplines that sensed an opportunity. They realized that if CO2 were inflated into the great Satan, it would be very beneficial for their careers.
Backwater scientists in the obscure specialty of atmospheric science became well-traveled celebrities by promoting the doomsday theory of global warming. Radical environmentalists joined the catastrophic global warming chorus. This worked pretty well during the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s when the Earth was warming. But then the warming stopped and now, after 18 years of no warming, the theory of catastrophic global warming is falling apart. To keep the money flowing, the global warming promoters began promoting extreme weather and ocean acidification, two new and bad things that are supposed to happen if we continued burning fossil fuels. They even began jiggering the temperature data to try to bring back the 18 missing years of global warming.
In 1978, by burning fossil fuels, we were adding approximately 1.5 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere each month. By 2012, as China and the rest of Asia grew economically, that had doubled to about 3 billion tons per month. This may sound like a lot of CO2 unless you know that the mass of the atmosphere is 5 million, billion tons.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
HINT: It’s like “plant food”
Where is All the CO2 Really Going?
Plants love it.
Sounds like high school science class all over again. The difference back then my teachers didn;t add “we’re all going to die!” like idiot lib teachers today.
I'm not a scientician (Simpsons reference, for those who don't get it), but I would guess photosynthesis, maybe?
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
It is yummies for green plants from giant to microscopic. Biomass scarfs it up.
Also, when the globe does warm, it puts up more clouds through water vapor that reaches stratospheric heights. Clouds shade from the sun. If the sun itself changes in output there is only so much that clouds (or lack of them) can do, but under a given constant solar output the clouds are a brake on such changes.
In the meantime, the popular warmist climate models just wiff on clouds. They don’t know what to do with clouds so they ignore clouds.
It was supposed to be a catastrophe, a huge disaster, but nothing happened and other than knowing the ocean took care of the oil somehow, we don't know.
Likewise with this issue. Just because we don't know the mechanism doesn't mean it's not being handled, just because we don't know the mechanism doesn't mean it's going to bring a catastrophe. There have been lots of crazy theories about where this is going, most bordering on the insane, in the mean time, it's our third cold Spring in a row on the Great Lakes, with another cooler summer seemingly in store.
If anyone argues about CO2, just tell them to stop exhaling.
CO2 is not a dangerous pollutant. It’s a trace gas that is essential to life. More CO2 equals more plant life. Arid areas are greening up as a result of more CO2.
If everyone who thought it was a pollutant would stop emitting it personally, the problem would be solved overnight.
Do not act rational and collected when the politics calls for panic.
There is about six million (6,000,000,000) times more carbon in sedimentary rocks like limestone, shale and sandstone than in the atmosphere. Compared to the lithosphere, atmospheric carbon is a rounding error.
It appears that half disappears over the course of a year (varies widely from season to season). But that amount is not based on new CO2, it is a portion (about 1/30) of the total "extra" CO2 that is still around. Therefore if we stopped emitting the levels of CO2 would drop quickly back towards 300 or so, whatever the equilibrium is.
Nature, either the ocean or plants, doesn't care about the difference between "new" CO2 and existing CO2. There is a difference in isotope ratios in emissions and a slight difference in uptake preference, but not enough to matter.
If we didn’t have CO2 the plants couldn’t produce oxygen so the windbags like Al Gore and BHO can bloviate about it.
Too simple. It is a trace gas responsible for all life on earth.
“Where is All the CO2 Really Going?”
“Plants love it”
Which means, if we do something radical like build desalination plants and pipe the water inland to arid places, by using that water to green the environment, we can do 2 things. The first is we can reduce the CO2 levels and the second is, by taking water from the ocean we can prevent massive flooding.
Sounds like a win-win.
CO2 is the gas of love by the puppet masters. It is the stuff of life. Every human produces CO2. Control CO2, you control life.
Never mind life on earth can not survive without CO2.
When I talk to warmist friends, I ask them questions like “What % of the atmosphere is CO2?” I have gotten some ridiculous answers! But I won’t give them the answer, I tell them to look on the internet. Next I ask them “What % of the CO2 is manmade?” I know they won’t believe me, so I make them look it up themselves. Most of them are quite surprised!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.