Started By
Message

re: WH Science Adviser: Make CO2 Emissions 'Close to Zero

Posted on 12/29/14 at 10:49 pm to
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
99010 posts
Posted on 12/29/14 at 10:49 pm to
What is the "net" exchange between the air humans breath in and the CO2 that is exhaled? Are you seriously going to try to say it is a zero sum? Because it is not.

So, we then get to the nut. Is the CO2 "net" a constant, set prior to the Industrial Revolution (which is when the AGW causing CO2 started), or is it "flexible" so the disciples don't have to face the hard decision of directly exterminating billions of humans?
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
108821 posts
Posted on 12/30/14 at 8:49 am to
quote:

It blows my mind that some people think that we can control the weather and climate. Ah, the arrogance of man.


To think that we can do with the environment and our planet whatever we want and think that there will be no negative consequences. Ah, the arrogance of man.

quote:

But it also shows the liberal mind. Everything works in theory.


Yes, glad to see you're starting to figure this out. Idiots use "theory" as an insult, but intelligent people know that pretty much everything is theory, some more valid than others. I can always pinpoint a dunderhead whenever they use theory in an insulting way.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
108821 posts
Posted on 12/30/14 at 8:58 am to
quote:

Are you the least intelligent idiot on the rant?


Using long winded simple words doesn't make you sound more intelligent, especially when they somewhat contradict each other. Just use "biggest idiot" next time.

quote:

More CO2 in the air means more plant growth.
Earth's current atmospheric CO2 concentration is almost 390 parts per million (ppm). Adding another 300 ppm of CO2 to the air has been shown by literally thousands of experiments to greatly increase the growth or biomass production of nearly all plants. This growth stimulation occurs because CO2 is one of the two raw materials (the other being water) that are required for photosynthesis. Hence, CO2 is actually the "food" that sustains essentially all plants on the face of the earth, as well as those in the sea. And the more CO2 they "eat" (absorb from the air or water), the bigger and better they grow (see table below).

Adding more CO2 to the air also benefits plants in other ways:
They generally do not open their leaf stomatal pores as wide as they do at lower CO2 concentrations, and they tend to produce fewer such pores per unit area of leaf surface. Both of these changes tend to reduce plant transpiration or water loss; and the amount of growth they experience per unit of water lost (water-use efficiency) therefore rises, greatly increasing their ability to withstand drought. And with fewer and smaller stomatal openings, plants exposed to elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 are also less susceptible to damage by noxious air pollutants, including ozone and oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, that gain entry into plants via these portals. Higher CO2 concentrations also help plants by reducing the negative effects of a number of other environmental stresses, such as high soil salinity, high air temperature, low air temperature, low light intensity, low levels of soil fertility, oxidative stress, and the stress of herbivory.


Congrats on being dumb enough into buying the snake oil that the oil and coal industry has told you.
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 12/30/14 at 12:07 pm to
quote:

What is the "net" exchange between the air humans breath in and the CO2 that is exhaled? Are you seriously going to try to say it is a zero sum? Because it is not.
It's zero-sum because humans eat food. Every C in CO2 comes from plants. By definition, if there are enough plants to feed humans (and animals), there are enough plants to recycle respiration. It's a closed cycle.
Posted by Cruiserhog
Little Rock
Member since Apr 2008
10460 posts
Posted on 12/30/14 at 1:39 pm to
quote:

So...your position is that adding almost 6 BILLION continuously running CO2 producing machines over 135 years is insignificant?

Thanks, I can freely ignore you bullshite going forward.



LOL

so I ll paraphrase your post so you can see how ignorant of whats going on it is....

Udtiger

"we breathe oxygen in...poof....carbon dioxide comes out. frick Crebbs cycle, frick Respiration...there are no other processes involved it just poofs into CO2."

"Oxygen goes into our bodies and magically Carbon just poofs into existence and goes thru some magical reaction and attaches itself adding to the net emissions of the planet."



UdTiger....you are an organic, MEANING CARBON BASED, lifeform

YOU GET YOUR CARBON USED BY THE BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES WITHIN YOUR BODY FROM THE ENVIRONMENT BY MASTICATION OF ORGANIC MATTER THUS ITS ALREADY IN YOU WHEN YOU BREATHE.
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 12/30/14 at 1:42 pm to
quote:

What is the "net" exchange between the air humans breath in and the CO2 that is exhaled? Are you seriously going to try to say it is a zero sum? Because it is not.


Of course it is. Its called the carbon cycle you blubbering idiot.
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 5Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram