Carbon dioxide: Has friend become foe?

Sacramento Bee ^ | July 29, 2002 | Edie Lau

[farmfriend]

We draw carbon dioxide into our bodies and release it with every breath. Plants need it to survive. How did a gas essential to life become a demonized pollutant that could alter the world's environment as we know it?

Carbon dioxide is one of the Earth's so-called greenhouse gases, which in increasing amounts can heat up the atmosphere. Increased heat may lead to wholesale changes in climate, disrupting the way plants, wildlife and people live all over the planet.

[Robert_Paulson2]

I knew that... but the article makes it sound like the gasoline creates from nothing NEW carbon dioxide... when in fact, it uses existing gases to make the 19 plus pounds.... fwiw... I think that is dishonest.

[Robert_Paulson2]

Believe it or not... I actually knew that.

The article SOUNDS to folks who read it as if something new, non-existant to our world was being created by combustion, which is NOT altogether true or honest. The CARBON was there in the fuel. The OXYGEN was in the atmosphere, created in part by plants that NEED and TAKE the carbon in and reprocess that compound gas into its sub components right back to its former state.

How it can be implied that a NEW, previously non-existant pollutant is now wreaking havoc on our planet, and how folks can be mislead to think that there is not a process counterbalancing this at all times, is beyond me. It's not like the internal combustion engine is creating a new and deadly element ex nihlo... It's just a naturally recycled element, that the plants, NO DOUBT appreciate us making, for their use... as if indeed plants can technically "appreciate" anything.

I got it.... to begin with... but there are NOT 16 pounds of carbon, in a six pound gallon of gasoline... was my point.

I did not say it well. Neither did the article, in my opinion. 300 children die every day from gun violence... is probably true, if we stretch boudries, terms of meaning and the general concept of what constitutes guns, and violence... but it is nonetheless a false, misleading statement in the final analysis... and is written for shock and sensational reactions it can beget.

That was my point... thanks for clarifying the chemistry formulas that relate to the combining of oxygen and carbon for us...

[chipengineer]

"Preserving trees doesn't help much but growing more would take much more carbon out of the air."

Especially if they are made into paper and buried in landfills. Recycling paper increases CO2.

[farmfriend]

bttt

[XBob]

You really should have put a big barf gigantic lie alert, particularly, on this part:

The math works like this: Each gallon of gasoline burned releases about 19.5 pounds of carbon dioxide, of which 5.3 pounds is carbon. California consumes 15 billion gallons of gasoline a year, according to the state Energy Commission, putting 79.5 billion pounds of carbon into the air."

This is really interesting, as a gallon of gasoline only weighs 6 lbs - and it puts out 19.5 lbs of co2?????

Fuel Mass, Units Conversion

[An.American.Expatriate]

The CARBON was there in the fuel. The OXYGEN was in the atmosphere . . .

maybe if we reduced the amount of free oxygen in the atmosphere, the evil carbon would'nt be able to mate with it to form the dreaded CO2 in the first place !! < / end of very silly idea >

[metesky]

Next: "Government Taxes Breathing." Large families hit the hardest.

New York Times headline:

Government Taxes Breathing
Women, children and minorities hit the hardest

[metesky]

Being a simple carpenter by trade, I too wondered how something could burn and the residue could have an increased weight.

Perhaps some one can enlighten me.

[blam]

"Being a simple carpenter by trade, I too wondered how something could burn and the residue could have an increased weight.

Perhaps some one can enlighten me."

You should try my meatloaf.

[blam]

BTW, I use a natural gas heater in my greenhouse during the winter. The plants love it. (Don't go in there though without properly ventilating first)

[Clovis_Skeptic]

The rate of bacterial respiration is going to be highest in the wettest areas where organic matter is broken down fastest.

So does that mean that "wetlands" also contribute to the amount of carbon dioxide?

[cogitator]

So does that mean that "wetlands" also contribute to the amount of carbon dioxide?

Abso-frickin-lutely. BUUUUTTT.... it must be remembered that the actual system is/was approximately in balance in terms of carbon flux to the atmosphere and carbon flux from the atmosphere. The other human activity that contributes to increasing atmospheric CO2 is land use change, because disturbance of the ground (and organic matter contained within it) allows higher rates of bacterial respiration. Increasing wetland areas would do the same thing. So while preservation of wetlands does maintain a carbon source to the atmosphere, it is minor compared to land use changes that have occurred since the mid-1800s.

[XBob]

the logic is posted above in several posts, about how they are counting the 2 oxygen atoms in the atnosphere each carbon atom requires to make CO2.

[XBob]

the logic is posted above in several posts, about how they are counting the 2 oxygen atoms in the atnosphere each carbon atom requires to make CO2.

The part the logic forgets is that plants use CO2 and expell oxygen, so the Greenies are really trying to kill plants by depriving them of CO2 and heat (global warming). If they would increase CO2, increase temperature, and the greenies wacko's would have more plants and more CO2.

What the real problem is, is that we have 3 planets in our solar system, with 3 different examples of what can happen.

Mars, very thin atnosphere, very cold, no life.
Venus, very thick atmosphere, very hot (around 700 degrees), no life.

Earth, moderate atmosphere, moderate temp, teaming with life.

[Robert_Paulson2]

heh heh.... any "volunteers" to help poor mother earth???