- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,851,020
- 51,491
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
What is exactly the same?Ah, okay.
So, you do know that the CO2 isn't actually in the form of a gas when you open a bottle of Coke, but it's a liquid since it's been dissolved, or that a single 300ml can of Coke only has 2.2 grams of CO2 in it, right?
That's really the same as the burning of fossil fuels, which has for every tonne of coal burned, 3.66 tonnes of CO2 are emitted. Exactly the same.
What is exactly the same?
I asked what the same as it's not so evident to me..... I really fail to see how you can't see that I'm being sarcastic when I say 2.2 grams of CO2 being released from a 300ml can of Coke is the same as 3.66 tonnes of CO2 being released for every tonne of coal burnt.
Anyone who did Chem 101 knows that oneSince I had to ask: How can burning one ton of fuel create more than one ton of CO2?
I asked what the same as it's not so evident to me.
Carbonated drinks do realease CO2, and worldwide
it's some few tones of gas. But it's stupid to talk about such minute amounts, of course. Unworthy of response
should someone bring it up.
Where I wondered about " the same" is, combustion of coal releases CO2 last seen in the atmosphere 400million yrs ago.
Is the release from carbonated drinks the same as in
also " new" to the atmosphere?
I 100% fail to see what your point is.
I was being facetious towards AV because of his idea that drinking soda pop is the same as industrial greenhouse gases releasing massive amounts of CO2 into the air.
LOL -- WOW
Just wow.
So now I'm raising my list to the level of industry, am I?
If I target practice with a .22 rifle, am I working at the same level as a howitzer?
So why do you include it on your list then, since it is a massively negligible thing that can easily be offset, whilst the mass emission of CO2 can really only be offset (in my own opinion) by the mass use of nuclear energy.
It was on a list of contributors to climate change.
I copied the list and use it to make my point against those who think we should be giving up our creature comforts, or else Guam is going to be underwater soon.
I failed to realize that there were two of youI 100% fail to see what your point is.
I was being facetious towards AV because of his idea that drinking soda pop is the same as industrial greenhouse gases releasing massive amounts of CO2 into the air.
I failed to realize that there were two of you
missing on a cylinder. Or three.
Slightly, quickly changing ecosystems causes extinctions and in extreme cases collapse. A whole lot of ice age eco systems were dying even before humanity spread out.So mankind and coastal ecosystems have been
in a state of continuous disaster for 12 or 15k
years.
It's an example of the effect that you are describing of a long term benefit and opertunities for the surviving species comes at the cost of significant dasmage.The dinosaur bit is relevant how?
Exacerbates...most everything we do
is like that.
Overpopulation is the core of all of it.
And we get countries like Russia, China, Japan,
Korea trying to increase birth rate.
That's what happens when you place a higher priority on the economics of the next couple of decades over survival as a nation over the next century.USA and Europe worrying about falling birth rate.
It is an ongoing problem, I agree.Pushing people back from low lying coastal areas
will make overpopulation more acute and obvious
but nobody is going to do anything about it.
Meanwhile people fuss with feckless symbolic
projects like e- cars.
Hold back the seas with lithium batteries.
Sea salt batteries on the horizon?That said, battery technology is an excellent component of renewable sources of power.
I bet it has.The jury's still out on the escalation of earth's magnetic north movement. It's up to 30-40 miles per year now. Does it have an influence on weather patterns, earth shifting ,volcanic volatility?
Blessings
What tipping point? I don‘t see any so far.Isn't it amazing that science is self-correcting?
The problem is not whether methane increases warming 20% rather than 30% but that fossil fuels has an overhaul warming effect on our climate. No need to do anything as we a have an extra year or two before breaching climate tipping points. Party on....
I doubt it has zero effects... but we have records of the pole shifting throughout the Earth's history and it doesn't line up specifically with mass extinctions, so I wouldn't rate it that highly.I bet it has.
Many people can argue about the details, magnetic pole wondering should certainly be one of them. However, nobody is able to see the whole picture.