71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Apr, 2008 02:38 pm
My presence here on A2K in general has become less to various (personal) reasons.

My presence on this htread has become even minor, because .... well, you've your opinion and I've mine.


Your conclusion above is as false as - that's what I think - your opinion about climate change.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Apr, 2008 04:15 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
My presence here on A2K in general has become less to various (personal) reasons.

My presence on this htread has become even minor, because .... well, you've your opinion and I've mine.


Your conclusion above is as false as - that's what I think - your opinion about climate change.


Congrats on the 10,000th reply in this thread! Very Happy

(Just noticed the big round number on my way to one of the gun control threads.)
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Apr, 2008 05:46 pm
Add Dr. Richard Zeebe of the University of Hawaii to those whose research indicates anthropogenic CO2 is overwhelming the natural order, as the IPCC says:



"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Before humans began burning fossil fuels, there was an eons-long balance between carbon dioxide emissions and Earth's ability to absorb them, but now the planet can't keep up, scientists said on Sunday.

The finding, reported in the journal Nature Geoscience, relies on ancient Antarctic ice bubbles that contain air samples going back 610,000 years.

Climate scientists for the last 25 years or so have suggested that some kind of natural mechanism regulates our planet's temperature and the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Those skeptical about human influence on global warming point to this as the cause for recent climate change.

This research is likely the first observable evidence for this natural mechanism.

This mechanism, known as "feedback," has been thrown out of whack by a steep rise in carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of coal and petroleum for the last 200 years or so, said Richard Zeebe, a co-author of the report.

"These feedbacks operate so slowly that they will not help us in terms of climate change ... that we're going to see in the next several hundred years," Zeebe said by telephone from the University of Hawaii. "Right now we have put the system entirely out of equilibrium."

In the ancient past, excess carbon dioxide came mostly from volcanoes, which spewed very little of the chemical compared to what humans activities do now, but it still had to be addressed.

This antique excess carbon dioxide -- a powerful greenhouse gas -- was removed from the atmosphere through the weathering of mountains, which take in the chemical. In the end, it was washed downhill into oceans and buried in deep sea sediments, Zeebe said.

14,000 TIMES FASTER THAN NATURE

Zeebe analyzed carbon dioxide that had been captured in Antarctic ice, and by figuring out how much carbon dioxide was in the atmosphere at various points in time, he and his co-author determined that it waxed and waned along with the world's temperature.

"When the carbon dioxide was low, the temperature was low, and we had an ice age," he said. And while Earth's temperature fell during ice ages and rose during so-called interglacial periods between them, the planet's mean temperature has been going slowly down for about 600,000 years.

The average change in the amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide over the last 600,000 years has been just 22 parts per million by volume, Zeebe said, which means that 22 molecules of carbon dioxide were added to, or removed from, every million molecules of air.

Since the Industrial Revolution began in the 18th century, ushering in the widespread human use of fossil fuels, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen by 100 parts per million.

That means human activities are putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere about 14,000 times as fast as natural processes do, Zeebe said.

And it appears to be speeding up: the U.S. government reported last week that in 2007 alone, atmospheric carbon dioxide increased by 2.4 parts per million.

The natural mechanism will eventually absorb the excess carbon dioxide, Zeebe said, but not for hundreds of thousands of years.

"This is a time period that we can hardly imagine," he said. "They are way too slow to help us to restore the balance that we have now basically distorted in a very short period of time." "


http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=human-warming-hobbles-anc

definitely not part of Inhofe's phony 400.
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Apr, 2008 05:50 pm
Datelined today, by the way.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Apr, 2008 06:49 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
My presence here on A2K in general has become less to various (personal) reasons.

My presence on this htread has become even minor, because .... well, you've your opinion and I've mine.


Your conclusion above is as false as - that's what I think - your opinion about climate change.

Fair enough. To correct the record, it was not my conclusion, but only a suspicion, and that is why I asked you the question. Thanks for your answer.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Apr, 2008 08:11 pm
The CO2 parts per million (ppm) in the atmosphere has increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution, but the average global temperature has been fluctuating since then until 1975. From 1975 to 2005, CO2 ppm in the atmosphere increased more than 14.5%, while the average global temperature increased less than 0.23%. Also from 1975 to 2005 the sun's irradiance increased more than 0.07%. Since 2005, the sun's irradiance has decreased, and so has the average global temperature, even though the CO2 ppm in the atmosphere has continued to increase.
0 Replies
 
miniTAX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 01:32 am
username wrote:
This research is likely the first observable evidence for this natural mechanism.
Man! We're discovering those "thousands scientists" and a "settled science" didn't have the slightest evidence to explain how the equilibrium for natural CO2, (which accounts for 97% of all annual CO2!) is maintained, which directly means they don't have the slightest idea of the whereabouts of the 3% anthropogenic CO2 .

Too late mates, the Kyoto protocol based on NON oservable evidence has been signed.

Quote:
And it appears to be speeding up: the U.S. government reported last week that in 2007 alone, atmospheric carbon dioxide increased by 2.4 parts per million.
"Appears", "likely", "could", "may", hey that's observable evidence in climate "science".
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 06:43 am
Heres an interesting article about oil...

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article3823656.ece

I wont post the entire article, but here are some interesting parts...

Quote:
THERE are more misunderstandings about the oil market than perhaps any other. In America, drivers are fuming and politicians are demanding explanations because petrol has hit about $3.50 a gallon. That's 47p a litre, less than half the 105p-115p being paid by British motorists. So "high" in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Oxford, Mississippi, is "low" in similarly named cities in Britain


(snip)

Quote:


(snip)

Quote:
There's more, but you get the idea. There is a lot of oil out there to be found and produced, not even including the vast reserves in Canada's tar sands. We might have reached the age of peak panic about oil supplies, but not of peak oil.


So the oil is there, but nobody wants to go get it.
0 Replies
 
miniTAX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 10:56 am
mysteryman wrote:

Quote:
THERE are more misunderstandings about the oil market than perhaps any other. In America, drivers are fuming and politicians are demanding explanations because petrol has hit about $3.50 a gallon. That's 47p a litre, less than half the 105p-115p being paid by British motorists. So "high" in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Oxford, Mississippi, is "low" in similarly named cities in Britain


Here in France,
a litre of gasoline ("SP95") costs 2$30 (1euro 50)
a litre of diesel ("gazole") costs 2$ (1euro 30)
(source :http://www.prix-carburants.gouv.fr/ )

Ironically, like in the US, the politicians who promise to combat high fuel prices are the same who promise to "combat climate change".
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 11:08 am
"There is a lot of oil out there to be found..."

Really?

Where?

Dont you realise we have looked, very hard?

And despite looking harder, we are actually finding a fraction of the oil we are actually burning.

You dont have to be a genius to come to a conclusion.

But having a modicum of common sense helps.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 11:24 am
miniTAX wrote:
Ironically, like in the US, the politicians who promise to combat high fuel prices are the same who promise to "combat climate change".


That is interesting.

Our Green Party wanted 5 Euros for petrol ... already five years ago.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 11:25 am
It may snow here tonight...
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 11:30 am
hey Walter did I ever say what a great avatar you have there?


Smile
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 11:42 am
Yes, you did Laughing
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 11:46 am
I thought so. Its still very nice though Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 12:47 pm
Steve 41oo wrote:
"There is a lot of oil out there to be found..."

Really?

Where?



Maybe here:

Massive Oil Deposit Could Increase US reserves by 10x
February 13, 2008

America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed. Thanks to new technology the Bakken Formation in North Dakota could boost America's Oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving western economies the trump card against OPEC's short squeeze on oil supply and making Iranian and Venezuelan threats of disrupted supply irrelevant.

In the next 30 days the USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) will release a new report giving an accurate resource assessment of the Bakken Oil Formation that covers North Dakota and portions of South Dakota and Montana. With new horizontal drilling technology it is believed that from 175 to 500 billion barrels of recoverable oil are held in this 200,000 square mile reserve that was initially discovered in 1951. The USGS did an initial study back in 1999 that estimated 400 billion recoverable barrels were present but with prices bottoming out at $10 a barrel back then the report was dismissed because of the higher cost of horizontal drilling techniques that would be needed, estimated at $20-$40 a barrel.

It was not until 2007, when EOG Resources of Texas started a frenzy when they drilled a single well in Parshal N.D. that is expected to yield 700,000 barrels of oil that real excitement and money started to flow in North Dakota. Marathon Oil is investing $1.5 billion and drilling 300 new wells in what is expected to be one of the greatest booms in Oil discovery since Oil was discovered in Saudi Arabia in 1938.

The US imported about 14 million barrels of Oil per day in 2007 , which means US consumers sent about $340 Billion Dollars over seas building palaces in Dubai and propping up unfriendly regimes around the World, if 200 billion barrels of oil at $90 a barrel are recovered in the high plains the added wealth to the US economy would be $18 Trillion Dollars which would go a long way in stabilizing the US trade deficit and could cut the cost of oil in half in the long run.
LINK
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 12:47 pm
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb
As of December 20, 2007, over 400 prominent scientists--not a minority of those scientists who have published their views on global warming--from more than two dozen countries voiced significant objections to major aspects of the alleged UN IPCC "consensus" on man-made global warming.

THE DISSENTS OF THE SCIENTIFIC DISSENTERS

……………………………………………………………
The CO2 parts per million (ppm) in the atmosphere has increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution, but the average global temperature has been fluctuating since then until 1975. From 1975 to 2005, CO2 ppm in the atmosphere increased more than 15%, while the average global temperature increased less than 0.23%. Also from 1975 to 2005 the sun's irradiance increased more than 0.07%. Since 2005, the sun's irradiance has decreased, and so has the average global temperature, even though the CO2 ppm in the atmosphere has continued to increase.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 12:51 pm
On the Bakkan oil reserve thing, the USGS report reports a modest oil reserve there but a rather impressive natural gas reserve which could be just as significant:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3021/
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 12:59 pm
Do your part.

http://www.gofish.com/player.gfp?gfid=30-1015582
0 Replies
 
miniTAX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 02:29 pm
Steve 41oo wrote:

And despite looking harder, we are actually finding a fraction of the oil we are actually burning.
That's simply untrue. Proven oil reserves INCREASE every year, despite the annual burning of 30 billions barels.
Get your facts straight Steve.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 10/12/2024 at 12:18:57