more ice in Antarctica

[Occams Barber]

Apparently the big decrease in emissions from vehicles and airplanes, due to Covid shutdowns and restrictions hasn't helped any.

Firstly: The decrease in emissions from planes and vehicles is at least partially offset by an increase in domestic electricity usage.

Secondly: It's way too early too expect any COVID related CO2 decreases to take effect

From the IPCC
"About 50% of a CO2 increase will be removed from the atmosphere within 30 years, and a further 30% will be removed within a few centuries. The remaining 20% may stay in the atmosphere for many thousands of years."

OB​

 

[Aussie Pete]

Conifers do pretty well without much attention. They also extract moisture from the air as well as from the ground. Red (Norway) pine plantations are common where I live. Once planted they are on their own. They are fast growing and so can potentially sequester a lot of carbon fairly quickly. And while the thinnings are used for making paper the larger trees are often used in log home construction.

I wonder what percentage of the earth's surface would suit. Australia has eucalyptus and radiata pine plantations. Then the greenies complain about diversity. They are also a major fire risk. I still think the cost is beyond what is feasible.

The real issue is how to maintain what we've got. I do not believe it is a coincidence that South America's rainforest is being destroyed and climate change happening. Australia is not exactly innocent either. A lot of land is cleared for agriculture, even though there are supposed to be controls.

 

[Aussie Pete]

1) Define false premise
2) Explain how carbon dioxide traps heat.

It can be demonstrated that CO2 acts like glass in your car windows. My car in the sun can get to 50 degrees C when the outside temperature is 30 C. The glass acts as a heat trap. By far the biggest offender is water vapour. It's a nasty cycle. More heat, more evaporation, more water vapour, more heat. It's another reason why deforestation is such a bad idea. Trees regulate CO2 and water vapour and provide shade to keep evaporation lower. This is demonstrable in suburban areas. New suburbs are often treeless. The older, adjacent areas are treed and measurably cooler.

 

[rambot]

Conifers do pretty well without much attention. They also extract moisture from the air as well as from the ground. Red (Norway) pine plantations are common where I live. Once planted they are on their own. They are fast growing and so can potentially sequester a lot of carbon fairly quickly. And while the thinnings are used for making paper the larger trees are often used in log home construction.

As I read it, conifers take up only about half as much CO2

Realistically, plankton takes up 30-50% of CO2 Sona discussion including them is important


Mindblower;. B cause of the sheer number of o2 breathing oeganisms in the Amazon, despite its lush vegetation, the ecosystem actually has a balance of co2 and o2. It is not the "lungs" of the planet I was taught in high school

 

[ozso]

Did you expect 10 months of decreased growth to somehow offset 150years of continued consistent growth?

Well with having only seven years left to save the planet I was hoping it might have some sort of effect.

 

[Occams Barber]

Well with having only seven years left to save the planet I was hoping it might have some sort of effect.

Seven years?

OB

 

[rambot]

Well with having only seven years left to save the planet I was hoping it might have some sort of effect.

So no idea how carbon dioxide traps heat then?

 

[ozso]

So no idea how carbon dioxide traps heat then?

Unfortunately I decided that my becoming an armchair climate scientist wouldn't make any difference in the great scheme of climate change.

 

[ozso]

Seven years?

OB

That's what I've been hearing here and there.

Clock in NYC shows how much time is left to save the world from climate change

 

[rambot]

Unfortunately I decided that my becoming an armchair climate scientists wouldn't make any difference in the great scheme of climate change.

Likely not but it didn't stop you from commenting on this thread like an armchair climatologist

 

[ozso]

Likely not but it didn't stop you from commenting on this thread like an armchair climatologist

Aren't threads like these usually comprised of armchair climatologists?

 

[rambot]

Well there have been a few posters with fairly close ties to research here on cf. But skeptics didn't listen or understand them either

 

[rambot]

That's what I've been hearing here and there.

Clock in NYC shows how much time is left to save the world from climate change

This is hilarious.

Now your getting your scientific understanding from ARTISTS??

Anything to avoid listen to the vast majority of experts I guess.

 

[ozso]

Well there have been a few posters with fairly close ties to research here on cf. But skeptics didn't listen or understand them either

I know. I've watched it unfold elsewhere. My first post in this thread was just "Joe Schmoe" thinking out loud. I don't have any desire to debate the matter.

 

[ozso]

This is hilarious.

Now your getting your scientific understanding from ARTISTS??

Anything to avoid listen to the vast majority of experts I guess.

No I'm just aware of its existence without knowing the details. But really what's the difference between getting scientific understanding from that and getting it from blogs, CNN and The Guardian? I agree with you though, it's all pretty amusing.

 

[rambot]

No I'm just aware of its existence without knowing the details. But really what's the difference between getting scientific understanding from that and getting it from blogs, CNN and The Guardian? I agree with you though, it's all pretty amusing.

I don't get it from there.
Personally, I read a headline and then click on the study itself and read the abstract.

There are reputable blogs but newspapers embellish a touch. Read the study to understand. That's the good thing about msm online; they very very often will link to the study itself.

Pretty great actually.

 

[ozso]

It's good to have a hobby.

 

[rambot]

It's good to have a hobby.

Learning is great!! I consider it an obligation more than a hobby though

 

[Occams Barber]

Unfortunately I decided that my becoming an armchair climate scientist wouldn't make any difference in the great scheme of climate change.

Firstly, you don't need to be an expert to understand the basics of Climate Change. I find I'm mainly promulgating any interesting studies done by the real experts.

Secondly, where you can, it's useful to be able to correct misinformation and misperceptions about climate change. I will normally back this with a reference to a reliable source.

Does it make any difference in the great scheme of things? - Yes. Anything you can do to help people understand that Climate Change is real, and not a Bill Gates conspiracy, can potentially improve acceptance for the steps we, collectively, need to take to minimise the problem.

OB

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I wonder what percentage of the earth's surface would suit.

Select species that will thrive. No need to cover the earth with trees. More grasslands, managed pasture land, and hay lands would help. Fast growing cover crops and green manure crops would also help. Fallowing more land or enrolling more land in the CRP program are also options.