Climate Change - Human Induced or Not?

[oly884]

-Andy, while I agree with you, I bite my lip when CO2 is called a "pollutant"

CO2 is a necessary compound in, with a few exceptions, every organic life form on this planet.

Also, cutting AND REPLANTING trees could actually be better for CO2 absorption than leaving tress alone. Now, I'm not condoning chopping every tree you see down. But trees are a carbon sink, when growing, then use much more carbon than a full grown tree. Think of humans, children eat more than a full grown adult because they are adding to their mass. Trees, when full grown, uptake CO2 much slower than a sapling.

I'm sure there are many discrepancies, but the general idea isn't wrong. Once again, this isn't an excuse to go chop down trees or clear cut, but the idea that we need to stop cutting down ANY trees to prevent global warming isn't the best.

[AxleIke]

don't forget the smaller a peace of ice gets the faster it melts

not necessarily. the rate of melting is directly proportional to the amount of heat that is absorbed. the heat can only be absorbed at the surface, so it would be logical to assume that as the size of the ice reduces, so does the surface area, and therefore the rate of melting...

Very true. with ice sheets, melting is accompanied by breakup, which radically increases surface area.

[neliconcept]

now i know with the ice on greenland its not actually taking up volume in water, but with the ice that is floating up near the north pole in the ocean.

with that melting, wouldnt that really decrease the volume of water in the ocean rather then increase?

[arjan]

On wikipedia it says that typically 1/9 (11%) of the iceberg is above water, when ice melts it reduces about 9% in volume (found through google).
The bigger problem is that all the oceans are warming up, and that will raise the sealevels as water expands.

[AxleIke]

Thats why ice floats. Unlike most materials, water in solid state has less density than in it's liquid state. That is why it floats. Since it has the same mass, it's volume increases.

Its why your beer explodes if you put it in the freezer.

Melting ice caps will not decrease water volume because they are localized. The ice people worry about is the ice that is currently on land.

[neliconcept]

yeah was just curious, I know greenland has like an 1/8th of the ice in the artic and its mostly all on land.

anything happening to antarctica though?

[AxleIke]

yeah was just curious, I know greenland has like an 1/8th of the ice in the artic and its mostly all on land.

anything happening to antarctica though?

Yes. Lots. Antarctica has a lot of ice on land. it is melting.

I'm going to wait and see. I save myself money by riding the bus, walking, and riding my bike. I turn of lights to save on my electricity.

I'm not going to buy a hybrid, nor stop driving my SUV. I like my SUV.

Keeping down your own personal pollution doesn't involve living in a cave. Just little stuff.

[oly884]

Bingo, saving the environment is much easier if rules and regulations are not put on people, but rather let the people govern them selves. Much like AxleIke, I turn off lights all the time, ride my 4wheeler when I can because it gets better mileage, etc. Not because the government or Mr. Gore told me to, but because I choose to. If you want to see what extreme regulation of the environment does, take a look at Yellowstone National Park and what went on there over most of the last century.

[calrockx]

Bingo, saving the environment is much easier if rules and regulations are not put on people, but rather let the people govern them selves.

That's the problem. Most people are, well, effing retarded.
Some of us get it - as far as being environmentally conscious - global warming or not. Most people just don't care, or figure "someone else will do it." So the government has to step in.

There's a law to wear a bike helmet. I don't think the law needs to step in there. If you're stupid enough to ride without one, that's just a cleaner gene pool. I'm simplifying that concept, but you get the idea. When it comes to the environment, that's something everyone shares, so I don't mind a forceful hand leading the way to promote positive change.

[oly884]

The forceful hand won't cause change, people cause change. Forcing the issue will result in rebellion against it. At what level do you suggest enforcement without tampering with our Constitutional rights?

Yes people are stupid, but do seatbelt laws keep stupid people from not wearing their seatbelts?

People WILL cause the change. If Jack, Judie, and Bobbie decide to replace their lights with CFL's and Joe comes over, you don't think that the other 3 will say how nice it is having a cheaper energy bill? And that Joe won't do it at some point?

I'm riding my 4wheeler in -10°F weather because I save money on gas. It gets 35 mpg, and is 4 stroke, so it's much more efficient than my truck. No one forced me to replace my lights or ride my quad. This doesn't mean everyone will do as I did, but the more people that do it, the more people will follow.