Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 29 Sep 2020, 23:10:42

vtsnowedin wrote:
Tanada wrote:
September 28: 411.04 ppm
September 27: 410.82 ppm
September 26: 410.88 ppm
September 25: 410.90 ppm
September 24: 411.25 ppm


Not rising yet, unusual as harvest time is on full swing in northwest Ohio now.


Do the deciduous trees and other seasonal plants in the Northern hemisphere consume enough CO2 during their growing season to make a measurable difference between summer and winter? I thought the plankton in the oceans far outweighed their contribution as far as CO2 absorption was concerned.


Yes absolutely. Plankton in the oceans is pretty evenly distributed because the Indian Ocean is counterbalanced by the North Atlantic and the Pacific is pretty evenly split north to south. This means the plankton part of the equation changes very little with the seasons. However if you look at the continents nearly 65% is in the northern hemisphere. This is why in Northern winter CO2 grows rapidly and then in norther summer shrinks just as rapidly. November through May we normally see CO2 rising. July to September we see CO2 falling, June and September/October we see the transition from up to down and vice versa. Deciduous trees are just the tip of the iceberg, needle leaf evergreens also grow in summer and go dormant in winter and theTaiga forest stretches across Canada, Alaska and Siberia with remnants remaining in European Russia and Scandinavia. Also farm crops and the broad sweep of prairie grasses and shrubs do a significant share of summer sequestration.

The true southern hemisphere land mass beyond the Tropics and Sahel belts only cover a slice of Argentina, Chile, South Island New Zealand and Tasmania in Australia which all together is not much land compared to the North above the tropic zone. North island New Zealand, most of continental Australia, all of Africa south of the equator and the bulk of South America lie within the tropic circle or the ten degrees that make up the southern dry belt. Sidney, Australia is right on the edge of the temperate belt at 33 degrees south. Buenos Aires, Argentina is just slightly further south in South America at 34 south latitude. Land south f those points have a much more pronounced seasonal effect, but if you glance at a world map you will see neither has that much land to the south of their location compared to the north. In North America the city of Birmingham, Alabama is about as far north as Sidney is south and if you have visited in winter you know it doesn't have a harsh cold season.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 16208
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 29 Sep 2020, 23:12:48

Image
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 16208
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Wed 30 Sep 2020, 08:37:25

Well then the idea that CO2 caused climate change will last decades reguardless of human actions is alarmist BS. If we stop driving ICE vehicles and heating our buildings with fossil fuels in winter the trees could remove ten parts per million each summer getting us back to safe levels in just a few summers.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12021
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby REAL Green » Wed 30 Sep 2020, 09:05:16

vtsnowedin wrote:Well then the idea that CO2 caused climate change will last decades reguardless of human actions is alarmist BS. If we stop driving ICE vehicles and heating our buildings with fossil fuels in winter the trees could remove ten parts per million each summer getting us back to safe levels in just a few summers.


I think that is unrealistic nonsense. There is no way you can ramp up EV's and the charging sources, storage, and grid upgrades needed and avoid a huge carbon blob of development making the situation just as bad. At the same time there are numerous other sources that are contributing. What is an even greater issues is the tipping points in the system that are already adding carbon and methane. Ocean heating takes much longer to be reduced than the atmosphere. I have read somewhere humans would have to stop all other activity except agriculture to arrest the increase in carbon.

We are screwed, let's admit it and choose strategies of mitigation and adaptation which are realistic and not fantasy solutions. These strategies involve realistic application of technology and development but mostly behavior that rich liberals and conservatives alike cannot stomach of voluntary poverty. Also the poor of the world do not want to stomach being told they need to remain poor. This is a trap with no exits only consequences
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Wed 30 Sep 2020, 09:29:44

Well consider that that graph shows a drop in summer in spite of all the CO2 we are presently spewing out in summer which includes all our industrial activity. Our summer driving probably balances some of our winter heating emissions so it is a pretty close thing that the plants have the advantage of in their season.
Don't be such a pessimist.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12021
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby Subjectivist » Wed 30 Sep 2020, 10:11:03

vtsnowedin wrote:Well consider that that graph shows a drop in summer in spite of all the CO2 we are presently spewing out in summer which includes all our industrial activity. Our summer driving probably balances some of our winter heating emissions so it is a pretty close thing that the plants have the advantage of in their season.
Don't be such a pessimist.


Summer doesn't last forever! In fall and winter the green leafy stuff in the north goes dormant and in many cases drops its leaves. A lot of that material is consumed by animals over the winter. Then in the spring those same dead organic materials that were not eaten and digested by animals over the winter decay from bacteria turning back into CO2. The cycle has always been up and down over the seasons, the issue is due to human releases each fall the 'bottom' is higher than it was the year before. The difference is what humans release that isn't absorbed by the oceans or geologic formations and accumulates.

Sure if you got rid of all fossil fuel use completely overnight the steps would stop climbing from accumulation, but what has already accumulated would stay in the atmosphere a long time, centuries to millennia, before slowly being recaptured.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4652
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 07:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby dohboi » Thu 01 Oct 2020, 10:06:05

We don't know exactly where we are wrt feedbacks.

Once the tundra really gets thawing, it will release enough CO2 to continue increasing atmospheric CO2 levels for quite some time. Not to mention sea bed clathrates, forest fires, and other sources.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19993
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Thu 01 Oct 2020, 10:49:45

dohboi wrote:We don't know exactly where we are wrt feedbacks.

Once the tundra really gets thawing, it will release enough CO2 to continue increasing atmospheric CO2 levels for quite some time. Not to mention sea bed clathrates, forest fires, and other sources.
There would also be counter balance of increased vegetation growth in the tundra consuming tonnes of CO2. The magnitude of that depending on the actual temperature rise during the summer growing season. Perhaps the tree line will advance north providing shade that will retard the thawing or the deeper layers of permafrost earth.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12021
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby dohboi » Thu 01 Oct 2020, 11:38:47

Sorry, there can not possibly be enough growth to counter balance the loss of the tundra/permafrost, which holds twice as much carbon as is currently in the atmosphere. http://www.permafrostcarbon.org/

Furthermore,
permafrost contains 1700 billion tons of organic material equaling almost half of all organic material in all soils.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permafros ... ge_effects

And note, from the same source:
... 110–231 billion tons of CO2 equivalents (about half from carbon dioxide and the other half from methane) will be emitted by 2040, and 850–1400 billion tons by 2100.

This corresponds to an average annual emission rate of 4–8 billion tons of CO2 equivalents in the period 2011–2040 and annually 10–16 billion tons of CO2 equivalents in the period 2011–2100 as a result of thawing permafrost. For comparison, the anthropogenic emission of all greenhouse gases in 2010 is approximately 48 billion tons of CO2 equivalents.

Release of greenhouse gases from thawed permafrost to the atmosphere increases global warming


These are likely conservative estimates

All vegetation on earth holds about 450 billion tons of carbon, but permafrost holds 1400 billion tons. So the math just doesn't add up for new vegetation up there to make up for permafrost carbon loss.

Recall that there are other limiting factors up there than warmth for plant growth. You see, plants need this little thing called 'light' to grow, and there is precious little of that up there most of the year :)
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19993
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 02 Oct 2020, 20:02:29

dohboi wrote:Sorry, there can not possibly be enough growth to counter balance the loss of the tundra/permafrost, which holds twice as much carbon as is currently in the atmosphere. http://www.permafrostcarbon.org/

Furthermore,
permafrost contains 1700 billion tons of organic material equaling almost half of all organic material in all soils.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permafros ... ge_effects

And note, from the same source:
... 110–231 billion tons of CO2 equivalents (about half from carbon dioxide and the other half from methane) will be emitted by 2040, and 850–1400 billion tons by 2100.

This corresponds to an average annual emission rate of 4–8 billion tons of CO2 equivalents in the period 2011–2040 and annually 10–16 billion tons of CO2 equivalents in the period 2011–2100 as a result of thawing permafrost. For comparison, the anthropogenic emission of all greenhouse gases in 2010 is approximately 48 billion tons of CO2 equivalents.

Release of greenhouse gases from thawed permafrost to the atmosphere increases global warming


These are likely conservative estimates

All vegetation on earth holds about 450 billion tons of carbon, but permafrost holds 1400 billion tons. So the math just doesn't add up for new vegetation up there to make up for permafrost carbon loss.

Recall that there are other limiting factors up there than warmth for plant growth. You see, plants need this little thing called 'light' to grow, and there is precious little of that up there most of the year :)


Last point first. On Earth every spot on the surface gets exactly the same amount of sunlight. In summer the north gets 24 hours a day for weeks grading down to the edge of the Arctic Circle where at the equinox the balance is 12 hours even. Even mId winter the
Arctic Circle has about 3 hours 45 min of actual sunlight.

Next, these figures for how much carbon is in the permafrost are estimates based on a few score deep core samples. Here is the thing, we know for a fact that carbon buried more ten meters decays extremely slowly due to the anoxic environment. That is how buried organic material changes into lignite, sub-bitumous, bituminous, anthracite coals and natural graphite.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 16208
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby nocar » Sat 03 Oct 2020, 05:58:51

The statement that every place on earth gets the same amount of sunlight is only true if you equate "sunlight" with "daylight". Living in Stockholm, Sweden at the 59 parallel, I am very aware of the difference between sunshine from a sun high up in the sky and sunshine from a low sun.
Even in summer when we have 18 hours of daylight, the sun never gets close to zenit, and most of the day it is quite low. In wnter, although the sun might be over the horizon for 6 hours, it stays low all day, essentially creeping along the horizon. So in terms of insolation, the amount of radiation from the sun, the poles definitely get less sunlight than lower latitudes.
Of course, that is the reason why the poles are cold and the tropics are hot.
nocar
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri 05 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sat 03 Oct 2020, 06:42:30

What matters to plants is the number of growing degree days which is the opposite of heating degree days for your house. Also the number of days between last and first frost coupled with the likelihood of late spring frosts after seed germination and tree bud emergence. Climate change will bring more growing degree days to the tundra but might make average frost dates more erratic. Which plant species will thrive will be determined by the actual climate delivered and good old survival of the fittest.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12021
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby nocar » Sat 03 Oct 2020, 07:35:21

I never came to my main point. Here in Stockholm, temperatures are often between 10C and 15C now in October,quite OK for many plants. Yet nothing will grow because the sun is not strong enough. Even the brassicas (kale and brusselsprouts) have stopped growing on my balcony facing south.
The greenhouse is shaded by a hill, so no sun there now. In summer it is quite different. Mold starts to grow on the plants in there now.
Here, in the fall the limiting factor is the lack of sunshine. We have had no frost at all so far this season, +6 C in the coldest night. In springtime, the temperature is the limiting factor. Even the most coldhardy plants, like spinach, will not grow until the soil reaches at least +5 C. That happens not until late April. So global warming might get things started a bit earlier, but will not extend the growing season at the other end, in this northern location.
nocar
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri 05 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby Tanada » Sat 03 Oct 2020, 09:36:10

nocar wrote:I never came to my main point. Here in Stockholm, temperatures are often between 10C and 15C now in October,quite OK for many plants. Yet nothing will grow because the sun is not strong enough. Even the brassicas (kale and brusselsprouts) have stopped growing on my balcony facing south.
The greenhouse is shaded by a hill, so no sun there now. In summer it is quite different. Mold starts to grow on the plants in there now.
Here, in the fall the limiting factor is the lack of sunshine. We have had no frost at all so far this season, +6 C in the coldest night. In springtime, the temperature is the limiting factor. Even the most coldhardy plants, like spinach, will not grow until the soil reaches at least +5 C. That happens not until late April. So global warming might get things started a bit earlier, but will not extend the growing season at the other end, in this northern location.


I don't believe this is correct. For example every year the Alaska State Fair has record making produce that develop to extremely large size. This happens because as soon as soil temperatures are high enough they plant and the extremely long daylight periods promote very rapid development and growth. It is not so much a matter of Calendar months as it it hours of sunshine between soil reaching the minimum temperature first killing frost. For trees or annual crops all that matters is if the number of hours of sunlight between minimum soil temperature and first killing frost is long enough for a complete reproductive cycle to take place producing viable seed. If you are an annual farmer and your fields produce fertile grains of Barley or Oats in that time limit it doesn't really matter if the week after you harvest things stop growing. Sure it is easier in lower latitudes where in ideal locations you can get two crops a year on the same acerage, but that also takes twice the expenses and twice the labor. No such thing as a free lunch. I have a cousin over the line in Michigan around 41 degrees north latitude who is very proud that he has been managing, by growing two fast maturing crops, of getting a harvest of winter wheat in the early summer/late spring and immediately planting again, then planting a new Winter Wheat crop in late fall after his second harvest for harvest the next year.

Here is the thing, we know in earlier climate regimes the deciduous forest grew to the Arctic Circle or in places further north and the Boreal Forest grew right up to the coast of the Arctic Ocean and extended over the islands of the Canadian Arctic and Greenland north of the arctic circle. Arguing that something which happened before can not happen again in the future is not very convincing to me.

I am curios from your statement why you built your greenhouse where it is shaded so early in the autumn? Presumably that means it is also shaded until later in Spring.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 16208
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby nocar » Sat 03 Oct 2020, 12:52:06

The location of my greenhouse: A week or so before the March equinox the sun starts to reach it, at first only an hour per day. About a week after the September equinox the sun disappears. Actually, it gets a little more direct sun in spring because some trees on the hill have no leaves yet.

Oh yes, things grow very fast in June and particularly in July when the soil has become warm. Beans that need +12 C in soil temp usually can not be sown until middle June. But already in August the shadows become much longer and the growing slows considerable.
And yes, if you have the rare location where there is no shade in any direction, so the plants get maximum sun, things can grow big very fast in June-July.
Stockholm's latitude is about the same as Anchorage, Alaska and the southern tip of Greenland. We are warmer and have deciduous trees, but crops stop growing in October.
Regarding climate in times past, the continents have moved around a bit.
nocar
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri 05 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sat 03 Oct 2020, 14:54:17

nocar wrote:The location of my greenhouse: A week or so before the March equinox the sun starts to reach it, at first only an hour per day. About a week after the September equinox the sun disappears. Actually, it gets a little more direct sun in spring because some trees on the hill have no leaves yet.

Oh yes, things grow very fast in June and particularly in July when the soil has become warm. Beans that need +12 C in soil temp usually can not be sown until middle June. But already in August the shadows become much longer and the growing slows considerable.
And yes, if you have the rare location where there is no shade in any direction, so the plants get maximum sun, things can grow big very fast in June-July.
Stockholm's latitude is about the same as Anchorage, Alaska and the southern tip of Greenland. We are warmer and have deciduous trees, but crops stop growing in October.
Regarding climate in times past, the continents have moved around a bit.

Wow did your designer/builder blow that one. A green house should be located to get as many hours of sun as possible on December 21st the low point and then improve after that. Sunrise on 12/21 should hit the east side and sunset that day should be coming through the west side with it fully in the light all day long. By march incoming sunlight should make internal temperatures well above freezing all day long without added heat sources. Black water barrels can soak up heat during the day to release it during the night. Original designs sometimes had the sidewalls dug into the earth three or four feet letting the earth walls and floor absorb the daylight energy and reduce nighttime losses through the walls. Often today designs on grade use supplemental heat and UV electric lights to completely control the growing environment to optimum conditions.
Ask any old hippy that grows weed and he or she will tell you all about it. 8)
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12021
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby nocar » Tue 06 Oct 2020, 17:25:30

Well, naturally we put the greenhouse in the sunniest spot possible on our suburban lot. The hill and surrounding trees make even more shade in all other locations. The shadows are long when the sun is low.
And for your information, at this latitude, the sun is over the horison only 6 hours on dec 21. Which means that it is does not rise in the east, but in the southeast and sets in the southwest, and at noon is only about 9 degrees over the horizon (I am not too sure here, it could be less). Furthermore, most days are cloudy, so no greenhouse effect for that reason alone.
This is my whole point: At high latitudes, it is not necessarily frost that makes things stop growing in the fall. Even if temperatures are well above freezing, the sunlight is too weak. This September and early October, so far no frost at all here, most nights even about +10C (+50F). (Warmer than usual)
Many plants, like my tomatoes, have not died, but stopped growing and producing. Lettuce and kale, which grow well in cool temps, (and mine are not the greenhouse but higher, on our southfacing balcony), also have stopped growing. The native plants, of course, have prepared for the non-growing season in various ways.
With artificial light and heating things are different. But that is beside the point.
nocar
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri 05 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Wed 07 Oct 2020, 01:22:14

nocar wrote:Well, naturally we put the greenhouse in the sunniest spot possible on our suburban lot. The hill and surrounding trees make even more shade in all other locations. The shadows are long when the sun is low.
And for your information, at this latitude, the sun is over the horison only 6 hours on dec 21. Which means that it is does not rise in the east, but in the southeast and sets in the southwest, and at noon is only about 9 degrees over the horizon (I am not too sure here, it could be less). Furthermore, most days are cloudy, so no greenhouse effect for that reason alone.
This is my whole point: At high latitudes, it is not necessarily frost that makes things stop growing in the fall. Even if temperatures are well above freezing, the sunlight is too weak. This September and early October, so far no frost at all here, most nights even about +10C (+50F). (Warmer than usual)
Many plants, like my tomatoes, have not died, but stopped growing and producing. Lettuce and kale, which grow well in cool temps, (and mine are not the greenhouse but higher, on our southfacing balcony), also have stopped growing. The native plants, of course, have prepared for the non-growing season in various ways.
With artificial light and heating things are different. But that is beside the point.

OK I will give you that on a small suburban lot with zoning regulations your green house is not in the ideal spot but the best that you can do within the rules. My apologies on that front.
I would expect that any green house not heated by some other means only becomes viable in March and gives the owner (for lack of a better title) about a sixty or even a ninety day head start on the growing season.
My own results this growing season are much less then satisfactory or sufficient to meet my annual food needs so I will try to stop preaching to the masses.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12021
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby REAL Green » Fri 09 Oct 2020, 06:28:50

“Green Deal Promises That Will Not Be Met”
https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/econ ... not-be-met

“Climate-neutral Europe by 2050? Forget it...EU Promises and Goals vs Reality Unlike the US where Trump wants nothing to do with green deals, the EU has made a number of pie in the sky promises. Eurointelligence, mocks the promises in Reasons to be Wary of the Green Deal. In theory, green technology could be to Europe what digital has been to the US and what artificial intelligence promises to be for China. We have our doubts, though. The EU is clearly overselling the green deal. The green share in EU projects is vastly exaggerated through dubious rounding-up practices, a creative accounting method that would land you in prison if you tried it on your tax returns. The EU has still not kicked the habits of the Juncker investment plan: a castle in the air combining hype and leveraged aspirations. The hard bit is not setting ambitious targets, like the recently proposed 55% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2030 relative to 1990. We noted an article in FAZ this morning by Hendrik Kafsack, who points out that this target requires, at a minimum, the following sectors to be completely CO2-emissions-free: energy production, traffic, buildings, and almost the entire manufacturing economy. He writes that the EU has picked all the low-hanging fruit, but has yet to take the tough decisions. De-carbonisation will be very expensive. And these decisions will only be made if the rest of the world adopts the same targets. Otherwise, production will simply relocate. We agree with Kafsack that a CO2 border tax is absolutely required to prevent this relocation. We also agree with him that emissions trading is probably the best instrument to achieve the target. Sectoral micromanagement, of the car industry for example, has become necessary because the system is not working as expected. Eurointelligence supports much of this nonsense, but at least they are realistic about things. Unless and until China is willing to act, nothing is going to happen.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inli ... k=i85Ibuxq
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: THE Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Thread Pt. 7

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 09 Oct 2020, 23:54:49



Week beginning on September 27, 2020: 411.06 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago: 407.97 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago: 386.77 ppm

I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 16208
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests