Simple steps you can take to save the world (and your money!)

[Icycle]

I recently finished the book The Weather Makers by Tim Flannery. This excellent book lays out in great detail the current scientific state of knowledge around human caused climate change. At the end of the book the author gives some good suggestions for how to reduce your personal carbon dioxide emissions.

Reducing your carbon dioxide emissions can not only help avert the worst scenarios envisioned by climate scientists, but it can also save you lots of money, and help to reduce our dependance on foreign energy sources.

• Change to an accredited green power option. If one of the electricity providers in your area offers green power, switch to this option, which will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that comes from your electricity usage.
• Install a solar hot water system. Solar hot water systems are relatively inexpensive and pay for themselves in energy savings in just a few years.
• Install solar panels. There are many local, state, and federal incentives to help offset the costs of purchase and installation, and once installed they pay for themselves in energy savings in under a decade and can last 20 to 40 years.
• Use energy-efficient appliances. Replacing an aging refrigerator with a modern energy-efficient model can save a lot on your monthly electricity bill. Just remember not to put the old fridge in the garage to chill soda!
• Use a low-flow shower head. One of these devices can dramatically lower your hot water costs while still giving a pleasant shower experience.
• Use energy-efficient light bulbs. Modern compact-fluorescent light bulbs consume a tiny fraction of the electricity of standard incandescent bulbs and last ten years or longer! They pay for themselves in energy savings in just one to three years.
• Make sure your home is well insulated. Good attic and wall insulation, double-glazed windows, and seals around your doors and windows can keep your heating and cooling costs down by keeping the comfortable temperate inside your house from leaking out.
• Check the fuel efficiency of your next car. The best hybrid-electric cars are up to 70% more efficient that least efficient consumer vehicles, and you can often find a model in the same class with 10%-40% better fuel economy than your current car.
• Walk, cycle, or take public transit. This not only reduces auto emissions and traffic congestion, but also saves money on gas and maintenance for your car.

Not everyone can do everything on this list, and even if you don't care about global warming, following recommendations from this list can save you hundreds or even thousands of dollars per year in energy costs.

 

[maniactickler]

I can find this book in the science fiction section right? 🙄

 

[drew70]

I'm not convinced that the current warming trend is man-made. We haven't really been tracking world temperatures long enough to take into account planetary long term temperature cycles. Moreover, it's a fallacy to say that man-made global warming is a "consensus of the scientific community." Many reputable sciencists disagree entirely.

However, energy conservation is a good idea for other reasons altogether. I like the ideas listed, though some are impractical, at least for me.

• Change to an accredited green power option. If one of the electricity providers in your area offers green power, switch to this option, which will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that comes from your electricity usage.

I only have one power option where I live. Allegheny Power from Pennsylvania. I doubt if it's green power (whatever that is) but it's far cheaper than Pepco, which services the MD/DC/VA area. I consider myself very fortunate to have Allegheny.

• Install a solar hot water system. Solar hot water systems are relatively inexpensive and pay for themselves in energy savings in just a few years.

Not for me. I need hot water and lots of it. I now have to care for several farm animals and things can get pretty dirty.

• Install solar panels. There are many local, state, and federal incentives to help offset the costs of purchase and installation, and once installed they pay for themselves in energy savings in under a decade and can last 20 to 40 years.

Love the idea. Way out of my price range.

• Use energy-efficient appliances. Replacing an aging refrigerator with a modern energy-efficient model can save a lot on your monthly electricity bill. Just remember not to put the old fridge in the garage to chill soda!

All my kitchen appliences are energy savers, bought within the last 2 years

• Use a low-flow shower head. One of these devices can dramatically lower your hot water costs while still giving a pleasant shower experience.

Have you ever actually tried taking a shower with one of those things? They suck out loud. You can't rinse the shampoo out of your hair and every day becomes a bad hair day. But my water comes from a well on my property. It's pumped into a large bladder within a metal tank in my basement. The tank applies air pressure to the bladder, which creates my water pressure. It is set for just enough pressure to give a decent shower.

• Use energy-efficient light bulbs. Modern compact-fluorescent light bulbs consume a tiny fraction of the electricity of standard incandescent bulbs and last ten years or longer! They pay for themselves in energy savings in just one to three years.

I love those bulbs and that's all I use in my house. The outside floodlights are a different story however. I can't get that kind of candle power from florescents.

• Make sure your home is well insulated. Good attic and wall insulation, double-glazed windows, and seals around your doors and windows can keep your heating and cooling costs down by keeping the comfortable temperate inside your house from leaking out.

This is the best thing one can do to conserve energy in the home. I recently added more 30 weight insulation under the rooms of my house that have no basement under them. Namely the kitchen and master bathroom. I've already got it everywhere else in the house, plus I opted for a brick exterior around the house which also radically conserves energy.

• Check the fuel efficiency of your next car. The best hybrid-electric cars are up to 70% more efficient that least efficient consumer vehicles, and you can often find a model in the same class with 10%-40% better fuel economy than your current car.

Unfortunately, living up a dirt/gravel road that is not county maintained requires me to have a 4x4 truck of some kind.

• Walk, cycle, or take public transit. This not only reduces auto emissions and traffic congestion, but also saves money on gas and maintenance for your car.

Can't do that either. Busses don't come out where I live and I work in another state.

 

[Bugman]

No problem with energy conservation here,as far as it is praticial.Am i the only one here who remembers when many sciencists said we were headed for another iceage,and they had all kinds of *credible* evidence to back up their claims?

You make some excellent points Drew,and please i dont want to hear that its only those who work for the oil and chemical companies that disagree.Climate change is as old as the earth,and there is nothing we can do to stop it,or alter it.

One thing we can do,and should be doing more of,is finding alternative energy sources.Because we can all agree,i think that the oil is going to be gone at some point,and it will be cost more and more to find what remains.

 

[kurchatovium]

The global warming thing is so bad we might have snow here in LA by friday LOL 😉 😛

Seriously many Icycles suggestions are good. Especially the fluorescent light bulbs, energy effiecient appliances, and insulation. I always use public transportation mainly cause I can not see well enough to drive so I dont have much of a choice.

There was an interesting bit of research going on at Cal tech a few years ago developing a chemical catalyst that could convert Water into hydrogen and oxygen just from sunlight. Potentially such a catalyst would be very useful and quite effecient. The hydrogen could be used in fuel cells which potentially quite useful IMHO.

 

[Icycle]

• Change to an accredited green power option. If one of the electricity providers in your area offers green power, switch to this option, which will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that comes from your electricity usage.

I only have one power option where I live. Allegheny Power from Pennsylvania. I doubt if it's green power (whatever that is) but it's far cheaper than Pepco, which services the MD/DC/VA area. I consider myself very fortunate to have Allegheny.

Green power basically just means power that comes primarily from renewable or non-polluting sources, like wind, solar, biomass, or hydroelectric. Even if you don't care about carbon dioxide, you might still want to encourage power producers to switch away from traditional coal-fired power plants, because they tend to spew out large quantities of mercury, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and believe it or not, more radioactivity than nuclear power plants due to naturally occuring radioactive elements in coal.

• Install a solar hot water system. Solar hot water systems are relatively inexpensive and pay for themselves in energy savings in just a few years.

Not for me. I need hot water and lots of it. I now have to care for several farm animals and things can get pretty dirty.

In addition to pure solar-only water heating systems, they also make solar-electric or solar-gas hybrid water heating systems. That way you can take maximum advantage of the free heat from the sun, yet still make sure you don't run out of hot water.

• Install solar panels. There are many local, state, and federal incentives to help offset the costs of purchase and installation, and once installed they pay for themselves in energy savings in under a decade and can last 20 to 40 years.

Love the idea. Way out of my price range.

Unfortunately, even with the incentives, these photovoltaic solar systems are still somewhat of a premium item. The good news is that demand is growing exponentially, which means production volumes are increasing, and prices are coming down. If you can't afford a photovoltaic system now, check back in a few years. You might be surprised by the price.

• Use energy-efficient appliances. Replacing an aging refrigerator with a modern energy-efficient model can save a lot on your monthly electricity bill. Just remember not to put the old fridge in the garage to chill soda!

All my kitchen appliences are energy savers, bought within the last 2 years

Excellent! People don't often don't realize that their 20 year old fridge that works fine might be costing them hundreds of dollars per year in wasted electricity.

• Use a low-flow shower head. One of these devices can dramatically lower your hot water costs while still giving a pleasant shower experience.

Have you ever actually tried taking a shower with one of those things? They suck out loud. You can't rinse the shampoo out of your hair and every day becomes a bad hair day. But my water comes from a well on my property. It's pumped into a large bladder within a metal tank in my basement. The tank applies air pressure to the bladder, which creates my water pressure. It is set for just enough pressure to give a decent shower.

I do have low-flow shower head, and it gives quite nice showers. Modern designs give a considerably better shower experience than the designs of a few years ago.

• Use energy-efficient light bulbs. Modern compact-fluorescent light bulbs consume a tiny fraction of the electricity of standard incandescent bulbs and last ten years or longer! They pay for themselves in energy savings in just one to three years.

I love those bulbs and that's all I use in my house. The outside floodlights are a different story however. I can't get that kind of candle power from florescents.

You might want to look into halogen bulbs for your floodlights. They aren't nearly as efficient as compact fluorescents, but you'll still save 40%-50% in electricity as compared with an equivalent incandescent floodlight.

• Make sure your home is well insulated. Good attic and wall insulation, double-glazed windows, and seals around your doors and windows can keep your heating and cooling costs down by keeping the comfortable temperate inside your house from leaking out.

This is the best thing one can do to conserve energy in the home. I recently added more 30 weight insulation under the rooms of my house that have no basement under them. Namely the kitchen and master bathroom. I've already got it everywhere else in the house, plus I opted for a brick exterior around the house which also radically conserves energy.

Don't forget about windows and doors. People often insulate their attics and walls and then forget about these giant holes in their walls.

• Check the fuel efficiency of your next car. The best hybrid-electric cars are up to 70% more efficient that least efficient consumer vehicles, and you can often find a model in the same class with 10%-40% better fuel economy than your current car.

Unfortunately, living up a dirt/gravel road that is not county maintained requires me to have a 4x4 truck of some kind.

There are several models of hybrid-electric SUV and pickup truck entering the market in 2007 and 2008. And even among standard trucks, some models like the Toyota Tacoma and Toyota Tundra get better gas milage than other trucks in their class. A little bit of research before purchasing can save you hundreds, or even thousands of dollars in fuel costs per year.

• Walk, cycle, or take public transit. This not only reduces auto emissions and traffic congestion, but also saves money on gas and maintenance for your car.

Can't do that either. Busses don't come out where I live and I work in another state.

Perhaps you aren't in a position to use these transportation modes, but many people are. A significant percentage of all trips are short ones that could easily be accomodated by walking, cycling, or public transit.

 

[BLUE_THUNDER]

if you want to save the world, save the cheerleader !!!

( sorry, i had to )

 

[Icycle]

I didn't really mean for this thread to devolve into a debate on global warming, but there are a few statements that I'd like to respond to.

I'm not convinced that the current warming trend is man-made. We haven't really been tracking world temperatures long enough to take into account planetary long term temperature cycles. Moreover, it's a fallacy to say that man-made global warming is a "consensus of the scientific community." Many reputable sciencists disagree entirely.

There is a preponderance of scientific evidence that carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by human activity is already affecting global climate, and will continue to do so at an accelerating rate in the future. An overwhelming majority of scientists in relevant fields are in broad agreement regarding this, as has been shown by surveys of thousands of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals. There are a very small number of vocal critics of human-caused climate change with scientific creditentials, but in every instance I have seen, their findings have not be replicated nor published in peer-reviewed journals. These critics get a highly disproportionate amount of coverage in mainstream media in order to give the appearance of balance, even though they hold very fringe views.

The greatest controversies and uncertainties in the scientific community around global climate change are not around the causes, or the broad outlines of the effects, but just how much the climate will change and how severe the impacts will be. And much of the uncertainty is around just how much carbon dioxide humans will continue to release in the atmosphere.

The temperature record is actually quite long and detailed. We have satellite records since the 1970s and ground-based themometer readings since the mid nineteenth century. Using isotope ratios and similar mechanisms, we can use tree rings, ice cores from glaciers and ice caps, as well as oceanic sediment cores to extend the temperature record back hundreds of thousands of years.

The Milankovitch cycles are set of changes in the earth's orbit, which are believed to have triggered ice ages on an approximately 100,000 year cycle. Some scientists looking at these cycles have suggested that we are actually overdue for an ice age, and have hypothesized that humans may have inadvertently avoided this with advent of agriculture approximately 10,000 years ago by increase carbon dioxide and methane releases, and by changing the earth's albedo by replacing forest with grassland.

Current carbon dioxide and temperature increases are far outside of anything seen in last million years or so, and there is little evidence for past temperature changes at anything like the current rate of change.

Am i the only one here who remembers when many sciencists said we were headed for another iceage,and they had all kinds of *credible* evidence to back up their claims?

There is a popular myth amongst climate-change skeptics that in the 1970s the scientfic establishment was predicting an imminent ice age. While there were a few scientists who were concerned about the potential for global cooling, the general consensus was that at that time climate could not be effectively predicted with knowledge then available. The popular press at the time, however did publish some sensationalist predictions of an imminent ice age, but that did not reflect a broad scientifc consensus of peer-reviewed scientific research.

One of the pieces of evidence that is sometimes cited by climate skeptics is a cooling trend that was observed between the 1940s and the early 1970s. It is now believed that this cooling trend was caused by aerosol pollution that partially offset the warming effects of carbon dioxide. With the introduction of legislation such as the Clear Air Act, these aerosols no longer being put into the atmosphere, allowing the underlying warming trend to reassert itself.

You make some excellent points Drew,and please i dont want to hear that its only those who work for the oil and chemical companies that disagree.

You may not want to hear it, but there is some truth there. In the scientific community there is broad consensus. Many of the vocal climate sceptics work directly or indirectly for organizations that believe they would be harmed by action to prevent climate change, such as oil companies.

Climate change is as old as the earth,and there is nothing we can do to stop it,or alter it.

Climate change is certainly as old as the earth, but it is absolutely not true that there is nothing we can do to alter it. There are now over 6 billion humans on the Earth, and we are burning fossil fuels at a prodigious rate, releasing enormous quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. We are releasing carbon dioxide at a rate that is much faster than the planet can reabsorb it, so it has been accumulating in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are already nearly 40% above pre-industrial levels, and at our current rates of production, are estimated to be roughly double pre-industrial levels by the middle of this century. Because carbon dioxide traps heat in the atmopshere, it causes the global average temperature to rise. This is how humans are changing the climate.

One thing we can do,and should be doing more of,is finding alternative energy sources.Because we can all agree,i think that the oil is going to be gone at some point,and it will be cost more and more to find what remains.

I'll certainly agree with this. Unfortunately there aren't a lot of great options for energy sources with as much energy density as oil. The world will still have plenty of coal long after we run out of oil, but coal is the most polluting fossil fuel available, so hopefully we won't turn to that. Much better would probably be some combination of solar, wind, and nuclear power generation, combined with large improvements in efficiency and conservation. If everyone took conservation steps like I started this thread with, it could dramatic decrease the need to build new power plants.

 

[Redmage]

Am i the only one here who remembers when many sciencists said we were headed for another iceage,and they had all kinds of *credible* evidence to back up their claims?

I think you may be, at least in the way you're presenting it.

and please i dont want to hear that its only those who work for the oil and chemical companies that disagree.

Lord knows, no one can tell a man a truth that he doesn't want to hear. I learned that in church.

Climate change is as old as the earth,and there is nothing we can do to stop it,or alter it.

Not all climate change is created equal. There is climate change that occurs in natural cycles lasting thousands or tens of thousands of years, giving natural systems time to adapt. And there is climate change that occurs on a scale of decades. The latter is not natural, and it's what we're seeing now. Since it's resulting from things that we humans are doing, there certainly are things that we could to do alter it. Whether we have the collective will to do those things is another question.

It is simply not correct to say "well, climate changes," shrug our shoulders and drive off in our SUVs. That's like abandoning medicine because, after all, everyone dies eventually.

 

[tickledgirl]

Am i the only one here who remembers when many sciencists said we were headed for another iceage,and they had all kinds of *credible* evidence to back up their claims?

I think you may be, at least in the way you're presenting it.

I think many people who remember this may be conflating it with concerns about a nuclear winter, which were much more widespread. (And much more valid, I think?) That was the idea that even a relatively small nuclear exchange could kick up enough particulates to block solar energy for a few years. But it had nothing to do with long term climate change. And obviously the clearest reason it didn't happen is that we haven't had a nuclear war.

 

[kurchatovium]

Ice ages happen for many reason just not because of Nuclear Wars. One cause can be from a preponderence of particulates in the atmosphere caused by a volcano, or meteor strike or by a nuclear war. Man made pollution in the form of particulates can contribute to this as well. So not all form of man made pollution necessarily result in an increase in global temperatures. Ice ages also happen as a part of the Earths natural cycles some of which we clearly do not have a complete understanding of.

 

[Bugman]

Ice ages happen for many reason just not because of Nuclear Wars. One cause can be from a preponderence of particulates in the atmosphere caused by a volcano, or meteor strike or by a nuclear war. Man made pollution in the form of particulates can contribute to this as well. So not all form of man made pollution necessarily result in an increase in global temperatures. Ice ages also happen as a part of the Earths natural cycles some of which we clearly do not have a complete understanding of.

Thank you Kurch!!!

 

[poppet]

thanks for this thread. i'm currently making a music vid for a british band and the song is about the environment. I'm completely eco unfriendly and know nothing about the environment so this will be really useful. lot of ideas already

thanks guys!

 

[Icycle]

Ice ages happen for many reason just not because of Nuclear Wars. One cause can be from a preponderence of particulates in the atmosphere caused by a volcano, or meteor strike or by a nuclear war. Man made pollution in the form of particulates can contribute to this as well. So not all form of man made pollution necessarily result in an increase in global temperatures. Ice ages also happen as a part of the Earths natural cycles some of which we clearly do not have a complete understanding of.

There is an interesting difference between the climate effect of human-made particulates and human-made carbon dioxide. Most of the human-made particulates and aerosols which cause global cooling settle out of the atmosphere in a period of weeks or months. But carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for centuries. That means when we reduced our particulate and aerosol emissions in the 1970s as part of the Clean Air Act and simliar legislation in other countries, there was an almost immediate climate impact. The cooling trend that had been in place since the 1940s immediately reversed. However, even if we halted all of our carbon dioxide emissions today, our previously emitted carbon dixoxide would continue to have a climate impact for centuries to come, until soil production, forest regrowth, and ocean absorbtion could remove them.

 

[kurchatovium]

:

There is an interesting difference between the climate effect of human-made particulates and human-made carbon dioxide. Most of the human-made particulates and aerosols which cause global cooling settle out of the atmosphere in a period of weeks or months. But carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for centuries. That means when we reduced our particulate and aerosol emissions in the 1970s as part of the Clean Air Act and simliar legislation in other countries, there was an almost immediate climate impact. The cooling trend that had been in place since the 1940s immediately reversed. However, even if we halted all of our carbon dioxide emissions today, our previously emitted carbon dixoxide would continue to have a climate impact for centuries to come, until soil production, forest regrowth, and ocean absorbtion could remove them.

Yes you are quite right most man made particulates are not fine enough to last in the atmosphere for very long, the nuclear ones are however. Hopefully that is not going to be a problem though. 😛 However Ice Ages happen for a variety of other reasons aside from being induced from particulates in the atmosphere and this is what I was eluding too. We are do for an Ice Age at some point. Just part of the Earth's history. As to when it might happen is anybodys guess at this point.

The particulate cooling trend is commonly associated with Global Dimming. Though there may be some other factors here as well.

Sulfates produced by aerosols are the main contributor to Dimming and the acts that you have mentioned have reduced these effects. So global dimming does seem to be on a decrease though it varies quite a bit form region to region so things are still a bit up in the air (no pun intended 😛 )


To read more about it go here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming

 

[Bugman]

:

Yes you are quite right most man made particulates are not fine enough to last in the atmosphere for very long, the nuclear ones are however. Hopefully that is not going to be a problem though. 😛 However Ice Ages happen for a variety of other reasons aside from being induced from particulates in the atmosphere and this is what I was eluding too. We are do for an Ice Age at some point. Just part of the Earth's history. As to when it might happen is anybodys guess at this point.

The particulate cooling trend is commonly associated with Global Dimming. Though there may be some other factors here as well.

Sulfates produced by aerosols are the main contributor to Dimming and the acts that you have mentioned have reduced these effects. So global dimming does seem to be on a decrease though it varies quite a bit form region to region so things are still a bit up in the air (no pun intended 😛 )


To read more about it go here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming

Finally a voice of reason here.

 

[kurchatovium]

Thanks bugman. I try my best. Below is some more info on the subject.

One should note as well that temperatures have varied quite a bit over history if one looks (see first picture which is for just for Europe by the way). Also there researchers like Svensmark (Denmark Meterological Institute) that tend to link much of the current warming to Sunspot activity. The graph is showing Solar Cycle Length vs. Global Temperature (see second picture.) However there does appear to also be a considerable increase in greenhouse gases as of late. (see quote) Also Svensmark data seems to be largely associated with the Northern Hemisphere.

Sami Solanki, the director of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Göttingen, Germany said:

The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures... the brighter sun and higher levels of so-called "greenhouse gases" both contributed to the change in the Earth's temperature, but it was impossible to say which had the greater impact.[19]
Over the last twenty years, however, Solanki agrees with the nearly unanimous scientific consensus that the marked upswing in temperatures is indeed to be attributed to human activity.

"Just how large this role [of solar variation] is, must still be investigated, since, according to our latest knowledge on the variations of the solar magnetic field, the significant increase in the Earth’s temperature since 1980 is indeed to be ascribed to the greenhouse effect caused by carbon dioxide." [20]

So there does indeed to be major contributions from greenhouse gases especially very recently. (see previous post with picture) This is alarming I would agree.

There are many cycles the earth has (see last pic) how relevant all of these are still hard to say. Also magnetic pole reversal for the Earth and the sun are not listed either these are critical IMHO. Newer models are trying to account for all these things. So far greenhouse gases are still "winning" in regards to most recent (past 20 years) trends.

My advice is to try to take up some of Icycles suggestions to save energy and money but dont panic. If we all proceed calmly we can solve whatever problems we are encountering.

(The above was an attempt an non-political totally scientific view of the phenomena. I tried to be as objective as possible. I personally believe we are seeing effects from both greenhouse gases and many natural cycles.)

 

[tickledgirl]

Kurch, what are you sources for those graphics? They look very interesting.

I'd like to emphasize that although this guy has been carefully excerpted in right wing publications because he was looking at anything other than human activity, he himself clearly says: "the significant increase in the Earth’s temperature since 1980 is indeed to be ascribed to the greenhouse effect caused by carbon dioxide." And he blames that on human activity.

Once upon a time, there was legitimate uncertainty over whether human activity would cause global warming. But now there are solid models that predict global warming from greenhouse gases, we have lots of greenhouse gases, and global warming is occuring.

Maybe it's all a coincidence. There's no way to ever know for sure. We could wait until the whole world left above sea level is desert & jungle, and we still wouldn't know for sure. Or we can try to do something.

Icycle's ideas sound pretty worthwhile. And Drew, it sounds like you're doing quite a bit more than most.

Question: Do you (or bugman) have any cites for scientists who disagree completely that global warming is man made? And just as a "preemptive strike": There have been some pretty over-the-top "scholarship" overestimating worst-case scenarios, and studies which have debunked those. That's not what I'm looking for. I'm looking for reputable published research that indicates global warming isn't caused by human action. The research has been done. The guy Kurch referenced is one of the people who looked for other causes, and pretty much drew a blank. Do you guys have someone who's actually hit paydirt to back your positions?

 

[TKpervert]

*hmph*
The world is packed with PHD's who know of no other way to make a living than to grasp for grants from various benefactors then publish spurious results which are then sucked up by the popular press.

Publish or perish.

There's even 'scientists' out there still predicting a coming ice age. Do a google on ...... new ice age.

The caldera in Yellowstone is going bury all of us before global warming even has a chance to start percolating.
.
.
.

 

[venray]

Of course if we all just stop living or revert back to pre industrial times and get a horse and give up electricity then the earth might last a few years longer.........

 

[tickledgirl]

There's even 'scientists' out there still predicting a coming ice age. Do a google on ...... new ice age.

Thanks, that was good for a laugh. When you hit the phrase "...noted economist Lyndon LaRouche..." you know you've struck comedy gold. 🙂

Of course, there was also the paper from Woods Hole. They're quite a bit more reputable. What was it they said? Oh yes, "Our main message is...that global climate is moving in a direction that makes abrupt climate change more probable..."

They make the point that we don't really know what kind of climate change we're going to get. But something's coming, and it's unlikely to be fun for anyone.

 

[Dussicar]

Embrace the flood.

Let it seeth through your collective hot-blooded veins.

Do you hear it calling? Do you taste it's promise? Do you want the embrace of its loving, tender caress?

Yes.

Yes, you do. You know that, in the deepest of your heart's desires, there is a yearning for the clean, cold, clear liquid of salvation to fill your very lungs.

You all do...

Dussicar isn't here, anymore..................

 

[kurchatovium]

Kurch, what are you sources for those graphics? They look very interesting.

I'd like to emphasize that although this guy has been carefully excerpted in right wing publications because he was looking at anything other than human activity, he himself clearly says: "the significant increase in the Earth’s temperature since 1980 is indeed to be ascribed to the greenhouse effect caused by carbon dioxide." And he blames that on human activity.

Once upon a time, there was legitimate uncertainty over whether human activity would cause global warming. But now there are solid models that predict global warming from greenhouse gases, we have lots of greenhouse gases, and global warming is occuring.

Maybe it's all a coincidence. There's no way to ever know for sure. We could wait until the whole world left above sea level is desert & jungle, and we still wouldn't know for sure. Or we can try to do something.

Thank you tickledgirl most of the graphics come from wikipedia which has several fairly good reports on global warming, global dimming, and solar variation. The picture of the historical temperature variation comes from a global warming skeptic and the picture in the odd language comes is from the Danish Meterological Institute which I found on the skeptic site. I tried to find sources relatively unbiased or at the very least well referenced. Not always easy in these politcally charged days.

Let me state some things that I believe.

1) Currently there is a trend of global warming.

2) That trend is due in part to greenhouse gases.

3) The trend is also in part due to increases in solar activity. Solar activity increases bombardment of the upper atmosphere reducing cloud cover. Reduction of cloud cover reduces the amount of Solar radiation that is reflected back out into space.

4) Particulates that are man made have slowed the effects of global warming, the reduction of particulates in recent years has I think has resulted in at least part of the dramatic increase in the last 20 years.

5) Magnetic Pole Reversal will affect the above phenomenon in a bad way I believe for as the poles begin to reverse the magnetic field of the Earth will drop considerable over the next few hundred years. This drop will reult in an higher bombardment of he upper atmosphere and a larger reduction in the cloud cover.

Some other useful information:

1) Almost everything is a greenhouse gas. Methane, water vapor, etc. Only molecules with no polarity and that are highly symmetrical will not affect the atmosphere. This means no matter how you burn any hydrocarbon fuel you will produce greenhouse gases. This makes nuclear power and fuel cell technology very important I think.

2) Remember the Earth has a carbon cycle. Plants and Alage convert carbon dioxide into oxygen so deforestation and reduction of algae by oceanic pollution can be factors as well. Methane production from various animals eventually ends up back as Carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is also tied up in oceans and in marble, lime and other mineral deposits. These amounts can be quite significant. Thus oceanic temperatures can be critical here. Volacanoes will release large amounts of greenhouse gases, these are usually offset by large amounts of particulates that stay in the atmosphere for a very long time.

Remember above all Don't Panic.

 

[Redmage]

Ice ages happen for many reason just not because of Nuclear Wars. One cause can be from a preponderence of particulates in the atmosphere caused by a volcano, or meteor strike or by a nuclear war. Man made pollution in the form of particulates can contribute to this as well. So not all form of man made pollution necessarily result in an increase in global temperatures. Ice ages also happen as a part of the Earths natural cycles some of which we clearly do not have a complete understanding of.

All of that is correct. But why do you think it's relevant?

Any massive source of particulates in the atmosphere could trigger global cooling. One such source would be nuclear war, and that happens to be a source we can control. So your point is valid, but so what?

Not all manmade pollution causes an increase in global temperature. Landfills don't (except as a source of methane). Pollution of groundwater does not. Sulfur particulates from coal burning actually have a slight cooling effect. However the CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels definitely do increase global temperature. So again, your point is valid. But again, so what?

Perhaps all of this was explained in your later posts, but I can't see quite why you dropped this in the way you did.

 

[kurchatovium]

All of that is correct. But why do you think it's relevant?

Any massive source of particulates in the atmosphere could trigger global cooling. One such source would be nuclear war, and that happens to be a source we can control. So your point is valid, but so what?

Not all manmade pollution causes an increase in global temperature. Landfills don't (except as a source of methane). Pollution of groundwater does not. Sulfur particulates from coal burning actually have a slight cooling effect. However the CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels definitely do increase global temperature. So again, your point is valid. But again, so what?

Perhaps all of this was explained in your later posts, but I can't see quite why you dropped this in the way you did.

As this is a non-political arena. The point was merely show that other things effect global temperature aside from just greenhouse gases. This was certainly not to miminmize the effect of these gases merely to show the many facets that is our enviroment. Also I never said all man made pollution always increase temperatures. Aerosol particulates are actually cooling things a bit. The Global Dimming I was refering too though this effect is on the wane partly I think from the regulations inacted that Icycle mentioned. Global dimming is largely due to man made pollution.