@steveTu As I understand it the scientists have tracked CO2 levels over thousands of years using data from ice cores. (Ice traps air and it's constituents can be measured). The rise in CO2 coincides EXACTLY with the industrial revolution and continues to climb at an ever increasing rate. CO2 is almost certainly not the sole cause but there is the well known 80/20 rule. You tackle the big things first which cause 80% of the problem and give you the quickest gains, then work you way down, it gets more difficult and the gains are smaller but gradually you deal with the issues. This is why they are focusing on CO2 emissions first. I agree waste and over consumerism is a big issue but you have to start somewhere. If we all suddenly switched to electric cars and replaced our gas boilers for electric heating the electricity grid could not cope, and how you generate that much power matters too. It has been said in China that their electric cars have a worse carbon footprint than petrol ones because they generate most of their electricity by burning coal. Nothing is easy but we must try.
and our lovely government considered it a good idea to stop the feed in tariff for domestic solar panels ??? That's an incentive to help towards our reduction in carbon emissions ? NOT!!
As for whether it is just CO2 that is the cause - and you say the model has been tried against previous events and it works (paraphrased). Where is that data/model? - as I'd love to see the parameters that were fed in and the assumptions made.
There are no patents in climate science, it's all published. Source data, peer reviews, conspiracy theories and counter arguments. Just start with the IPCC sources and follow your search engine
and our lovely government considered it a good idea to stop the feed in tariff for domestic solar panels ??? That's an incentive to help towards our reduction in carbon emissions ? NOT!!
That was so we could all save money on the green taxes levied on energy bills to pay for it. I'm sure you've noticed the huge reduction in your bills?
Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
Not sure there's a flaw. I totally agree they'll be times of peak usage, but that still doesn't mean there will be as many cars in total. And it won't reduce mileage covered obviously (see below). But I would guess (and if I ran the hire co) there would be different grades of car - so where today I drive in 5 person car, in future my trips would be in whatever size suited the trip - and based on whatever 'occupancy'. Again cutting CO2. I would assume that the natural extension of this is journey sharing. Multiple people doing roughly the same trip - a bus service that is booked as you need it in effect - so you book the vehicle by grade and occupancy.
Currently we have what - 30M cars - so unless you're telling me that all 30M are on the road at the same time - which I very much doubt.
If the sole idea is to reduce CO2 though, then what needs to be tackled is the need to travel in the first place as I said before.
Waste is CO2. 74kg of wasted food per capita in the UK - that is CO2 - 60+ million times 74kg of wasted food - what CO2 was used in that? How much in the transport from Kenya or China or New Zealand or wherever?. If I bin my Christmas crackers (simple case) and they were manufactured in China - I have not only wasted the production CO2, but all the CO2 used in the chain.
This thread was looking at the CO2 cost of meat production - but I'm not sure that that should be the worry. Wasting and shipping 'stuff' thousands of miles should be the first thing tackled. I honestly don't think I need to change my diet - but I do need to change my lifestyle and reduce what I buy and how long I use something for - but I repeat - the problem is that the west is based on buy - buy - buy - that is what makes the system work. The economy of this country relies on us spending our money on 'stuff'.
Edited...as for the historical CO2 - I knew of the ice cores. But what does that tell you about the ecology at that time in general - what plants, what animals,what micro organisms, what sun activity, what volcanic, what seismic, what........?
My daughter is just about to move into a new build. No solar panels, no heat pump - just a bog standard gas boiler (and not even a combi - so on for heating 'accumulated' hot water in a tank that then cools).
Wouldn't you think by now that all new builds would have certain standards?
And again - back to waste - if the government is serious about CO2 - then why allow this to happen only to have to replace heating systems in a few years?
I'm not sure that that should be the worry. Wasting and shipping 'stuff' thousands of miles should be the first thing tackled.
@steveTu we have to do all of it. It's far too late to be arguing about either/or. There is no inherent conflict in addressing species decline, emissions, deforestation, ocean health... The onus is one humans to address these issues as we created the problems.
Good posts Steve and Rick, , unfortunately not too many see the wider picture, as you say, let’s all hug, return out black flower pot to the garden centre, refuse the plastic bag and all will be well. What can they do about methane ? it bubbles up from the oceans, and the wetlands, I’ve seen and smelled it on Dartmoor. If they think not eating beef will cure that, then good luck with that one as well.
Not disputing your argument, but whatever you saw and smelled on Dartmoor, it wasn't methane. It is colourless and odourless.
1995-2019.... If a certain area has been largely ignored (check for references to micro-organisms in the 1995 report) - then how can you form valid opinion?
Oddly, just as people are becoming aware of the massive effect of micro organisms in the human body (poo transplant anyone?), the effect is also seen across the planet. The ecosystem is the micro organisms.
So if by pollution we reduce the bio mass of these organisms and they were locking in CO2 - could it not just possibly be that an increase in CO2 being tackled at the symptom end maybe isn't the real solution? Could it be by preserving the micro organisms, CO2 reduces? Could there then be another correlation between pollution and CO2?
Posts
I agree waste and over consumerism is a big issue but you have to start somewhere. If we all suddenly switched to electric cars and replaced our gas boilers for electric heating the electricity grid could not cope, and how you generate that much power matters too. It has been said in China that their electric cars have a worse carbon footprint than petrol ones because they generate most of their electricity by burning coal.
Nothing is easy but we must try.
That's an incentive to help towards our reduction in carbon emissions ? NOT!!
Hostafan1 said: That was so we could all save money on the green taxes levied on energy bills to pay for it. I'm sure you've noticed the huge reduction in your bills?
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
@steveTu we have to do all of it. It's far too late to be arguing about either/or. There is no inherent conflict in addressing species decline, emissions, deforestation, ocean health... The onus is one humans to address these issues as we created the problems.