Global Warming Countermeasures

[Logan Deathbringer 0]

Okay, I was reading this article at Popular science and found it pretty interesting. It demonstrates with the various ways that are used to/experimented on to counteract global warming, let me give a brief explanation.

Global warming is primarily caused by the Greenhouse effect. For an detailed explanation on the greenhouse effect, visit the link that I found off this site.

So, how to stop global warming?

in March 2001 President George W. Bush had withdrawn U.S. support for the Kyoto Protocol

Kyoto is out. US had to find another means of either:

1) reducing greenhouse gases/emissions
2) counteract the increasing CO2 in the air
3) or something... crazy

The most feasible option at the moment is actually the Weyburn CO2 Project, which started in July 2000. The project itself is actually quite promising, but it does have drawbacks.

On the other extreme, we have the crazy idea of putting a huge mirror in between the Sun and the Earth, which would *reduce* but not completely block the Sun's rays from reaching the earth - and therefore cooling us by a bit.

Not only does this doesn't address the CO2 emissions we have in the atmosphere, and would cost an astronomical amount to start a project like that.

Sounds crazy huh?

What do you think?

[Neverseen 0]

The climat already started changing and even if we start doing something right NOW, we'll need to wait 50 years before it works. And these lazy bastards better do something NOW before it goes even worse. In fact it's all about the money. Some rich arses don't want people to use hydrogene cars because nobody would buy petrol anymore.

[Raskull 0]

yeah the economy is getting crazy... gas prices here are $2.44 per gal. and thats regular... i think diesel is already over $3.00and its never been this hot in massachusetts... its like 90 and really humid right now... i think ill go take a swim lol...but yeah...something has to be done about this.

[xcaverx 0]

That does sound crazy. Some other far out but possible ways to reduce global warming are to sink carbon into the ocean floor, to increase the oceanic algae population by fertilizing the seas with trace nutrients, to create vast new carboon reserves in the form of new forests, to jettison carbon into space. The most readily accepted idea is the hydrogen economy. Hydrogen fuel cells would be much more efficient than present power sytems, letting us use less fuel to get the same economic benefit. Ditto nuclear energy.The Kyoto countries seem to be increasing carbon emissions even faster than we (the U.S.) are. I always felt Kyoto was just a way to placate the environmental movement without doing anything serious to slow down carbon emissions. To the extent that Kyoto hampers economic growth and R&D, it may be blocking progress on controlling carbon emissions.

[Moody 0]

The global warning is a natural proces. However the greenhouse-effect (broeikaseffect in Dutch, love the word) is not. It is caused by gasses that destruct the ozon-layer (I have no idea if that's spelled correctly) and they warm up Earth too quickly. I think the attitude of the US is ridiculous. This is the country with the largest industrial meaning in the world. The mayor part of CO2 is American. But what does Bush do to stop that? Absolutely nothing. The US find economics and finances more important than environment. But, basically, if you destroy the environment by earning more money than anyone, eventually there is nobody left to sell your stuff to. On the other hand, if you make less money and treat nature a bit better people can go on consuming your stuff for much longer. On the longer term, what works best? Maybe the Bush-generation only cares about making money, and not about the world and their (own) children.

[crs_cwiz1405241504 0]

The global warning is a natural proces. However the greenhouse-effect (broeikaseffect in Dutch, love the word) is not. It is caused by gasses that destruct the ozon-layer (I have no idea if that's spelled correctly) and they warm up Earth too quickly. I think the attitude of the US is ridiculous. This is the country with the largest industrial meaning in the world. The mayor part of CO2 is American. But what does Bush do to stop that? Absolutely nothing. The US find economics and finances more important than environment. But, basically, if you destroy the environment by earning more money than anyone, eventually there is nobody left to sell your stuff to. On the other hand, if you make less money and treat nature a bit better people can go on consuming your stuff for much longer. On the longer term, what works best? Maybe the Bush-generation only cares about making money, and not about the world and their (own) children.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you have gone a bit astray there haven't you?? greenhouse gases don't destroy the ozone layer, CFCs do!!!. Actually, the thing is that these gases form a layer in the earth's atmosphere and prevent the reflected radiation of the sun from escaping and trap it there, increasing the temperature. Another shocking thing i've heard is that the greenhouse effect wont last after around 300 years or so, cause by then the ice age will begin slowly and nullify the effect.

[Moody 0]

I didn't say greenhouse gasses destroy the ozon layer. I said that the proces you described is calles greenhouse effect.So I guess you have gone a bit astray as well...

[DigitalDingo 0]

I too think the US climate politics are completely ridiculous. And thereâs unfortunately ONE big reason for this: The Exxon industry â an oil company which funds both the US government and climate change sceptics. By the way I came across this funny (and however frightening) site: Exxon Secrets

Of course one has to admit that thereâs (unfortunately) no proof what so ever of the global warming being a man-made creation. But what we DO know is that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is too high to be a natural increase. And that will never be a good sign. So even though some people donât think the global warming is caused by CO2 this should be no excuse for allowing an amount of CO2 that high in the atmosphere.

[Houdini 0]

One simple question? If CFC's "destroy" the ozone layer how is that even possible...CFC's are heavier than ain and thus settle to the ground so how does something heavier than air get into the inosphere...by a rocket booster?HA HA HA

[kaputnik 0]

Global warming is primarily caused by the Greenhouse effect.  For an detailed explanation on the greenhouse effect, visit the link that I found off this site.

....

....

What do you think?

1064314863[/snapback]

This article put me right into aggressive research mode. Global warming, greenhouse effects and human interaction with the environment has for a while now (nearly as long as I can remember), been on the forefront of news, debates and other hullabaloo.

 

In my quest towards further understanding our environment, the conflicting views, the raw and processed data..etc.. I’ve come across some very interesting facts, figures, notions and concepts indeed.

 

Before you read any further, I suggest you do the following:

Grab a rugged mountain backpack order some sort of all weather fire lighting gadget like this (Check this out), put in all the essential survival gear, read up a bit on all weather survival and food gathering and finally be prepared to head for the hills.

 

Before I get along with making wild conclusions, let me review in short some of the material I’ve recently had the chance of coming across (all of it on the internet – most of it all referenced to research data).

 

Global Warming: Our understanding – that of the common person, of global warming is that we humans pollute the air with carbon dioxide, which accumulates in the atmosphere, trapping in heat from the sun (caused by light bouncing of material surfaces causing heat which is not dissipated thus becoming entrapped in the atmosphere – making things really warm). Global warming is this and more. Sure, global warming is caused to a certain extent by the green house effect, but that is a natural occurrence that has been happening on this planet since the planet’s forming an atmosphere.

 

The greenhouse effect essentially traps heat within our atmosphere because of the composition of the atmosphere itself. That’s something that we all understand. However, it may be that human involvement in creating excess carbon dioxide, thus directly affecting earth’s temperature is miniscule indeed (appx. 0.2% to 0.3% of all the carbon dioxide released every year)< data here>.

 

Now, looking back at earth’s history (through the study of ice-core samples from Arctic and Antarctic ice stations), scientists have come to the conclusion that earth may actually be going through a “normal” phase of heating which occurs in cycles. These cycles occur every 40 years, 400 years, 20,000 years, 40,000 years and a 100,000 years. As far as my understanding of the studied research goes, there are small troughs in the weather pattern with temperatures dropping every 40 years , with the over all temperature forming a deeper trough every 400 years and so on where there is a massive drop in the trough in the middle of the 100,000 year cycle. However, at the end of each trough when the temperatures do rise, there are dramatic changes in the Earth’s environment. < Some Timelines >

 

Now, cool brisk air is all right, but imagine the famine, hunger and worldwide disaster if the world suddenly became covered swathed in humongous sheets of ice and glacier..!! Life really would become inconvenient then. But we shall come to that in a bit. Lets look at the other reasons why our planet tends to heat up (since that is what all the fuss is about all the time). We definitely have the sun and Earth’s rather elliptical orbit to blame. And, in cycles matching exactly to the figures mentioned before when there are drops in the temperature, is when the planet moves away from the sun a bit or there is some kind of solar activity. There are also a great number of variation is the amount of white material available on the planet at any given time which reflects heat building light. (Also given the fact that polar ice is melting, we’re going to have less of the reflective stuff around). There’s also the shifting of continents and thus resulting in the change of course of ocean currents that play a major role in the heating of the planet. < Loads of infor on global heating and iceages>

 

Results of global warming as I see it:

 

The heat is building, we all know it and there’s not too much we can actually do about it. It’s what is bound to happen that is scary, shocking and in terms of self preservation, absolutely mind blowing.

 

First: Heat buildup – whether caused by humans of not ( most likely this is an uncontrollable phenomenon caused by all carbon bio-forms together) will result in the polar ice melting. Polar ice melting will immediately result in a lowered reflective profile for the north hemisphere. Result – faster heating.

 

Second: The rising heat will cause methane hydrates on the ocean floors to melt and release tremendous amounts of methane into the atmosphere. According to the US ocean drilling program there is about 200,000 trillion tones of methane hydrate (US shores) on the ocean floor < Lowdown on methane hydrates > (good news if we learn how to tap it since it would cover world energy needs for the next few thousand years). Also, methane is 20 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and one pound of methane hydrate can release 160 times its volume in gas. All that methane released into the air because of warming water will cause a flash build up of heat, overpower life-forms that survive on oxygen and bring about massive firestorms over ocean stretches.

 

Third: With the above two happening, the ice caps will further melt causing the ocean levels to rise by 20 to 30 feet. If you’ve ever put a few cubes of ice into a glass and then poured water into the glass you’d have noticed that ice floats. You may even have guessed what’s on my mind. The Ross Ice Shelf. < The Ross Ice Shelf - more on it> What would happen is that the suddenly rising waters, other than totally flooding countries like Holland and Bangladesh, will crack the Ross Ice Shelf off the Antarctic Continent and form the worlds largest and potentially the most deadliest ice cube ever. Why I say deadly is because, a mass of ice that large, pushed into the ocean my prevailing currents would cause the Earth to shudder, wobble and finally topple over by about 90 degrees. Result - instant doomsday. There would be Earthquakes the likes humans have not seen, floods which Noah would only understand and shifting of landmasses that planets being built would only undergo.

 

And you wonder why so many countries are so aggressively gunning to find water on Mars. Yes, now you probably understand the underlying fears. As of now, we’re stuck on the planet.

 

An Ice age – Another world a-coming.

 

Right, so all this catestrophy occurs. What’s the result?? Well immense fractures int eh Earth’s crust would cause innumerable volcanoes. These would thrust very large amounts of dust and soot into the atmosphere, completely blocking out most sunlight for a great many years, suddenly chilling down the planet. By the time the dust settles, any survivors would be facing a full blown ice age, to be overtaken by global warming in… say about another 100,000 years perhaps??!!

 

Some of the reading I did to come to the above conclusion:

 

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

http://www.john-daly.com/history.htm

http://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

http://web.ornl.gov/info/reporter/no16/methane.htm

https://str.llnl.gov/str/Durham.html

http://www.mbari.org/science/seafloor-processes/greenhouse-gases/

http://www.howstuffworks.com/

http://www.resilience.org/stories/2004-12-15/methane-burps-ticking-time-bomb

http://loe.org/shows/shows.html?programID=97-P13-00002

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/

 

[Norm35 0]

This topic drives me crazy, to say the least. As far as science knows, the whole in the ozone layer is a natural occrance. One that is almost like a defense mechanisim for our atmosphere. It's also believed that this is nothing new, just new to us as in the distant past there was no real way to see, or test for something like this. There is so much to take into consideration, not just the earth itself. You have gravitational pulls that are in a constant state of flux due to planetary alignment, other solar systems alignment, industrial population, etc.Everytime there is a natural disaster, the conservationists come out of the woodwork with dooms day theroms. Our atmosphere and the earths surface are always changing, it's just that some of these changes take hundreds, maybe thousands of years to occur. Some of the things we have recently seen could be a common reoccruance that could be thousands of years old. We have no real way of knowing this. While i agree that we need to relax on all of the pollutants we put into the air, I think the changes we have seen in the atmosphere run much deeper then just the results of man kinds contributions.

[evought 0]

you have gone a bit astray there haven't you?? greenhouse gases don't destroy the ozone layer, CFCs do!!!. Actually, the thing is that these gases form a layer in the earth's atmosphere and prevent the reflected radiation of the sun from escaping and trap it there, increasing the temperature. Another shocking thing i've heard is that the greenhouse effect wont last after around 300 years or so, cause by then the ice age will begin slowly and nullify the effect.

1064315493[/snapback]

Oddly enough, he's got it close to right. CFCs, which destroy the ozone layer, are *also* very effective greenhouse gases. It is not just CO2 which traps heat (infrared). Many of the common coolants are even better at trapping heat and harder to get rid of.

 

The CFCs are everywhere in the atmosphere, not just over the poles. The reason the ozone hole is over the poles is because the CFCs destroy ozone faster where there are large amounts of airborne ice crystals. For some reason, the chemical reaction happens faster on the surface of the ice.

 

Yes, greenhouse warming may very well trigger an ice age cooling effect. Not only that, but it can cause severe local cooling in the short term. Some of the winter storms we have had in the past several years may be attributed to this. Although *average* global temperatures are increasing, the overall effect is to make weather more chaotic. Deserts get deluged in rain, places with mild weather suddenly get very cold or very hot because of changing ocean or air currents.

 

One off the big effects we have already seen is the displacement of cold air masses over the poles. The excess heat caused by greenhouse warming pushes cold air away from the poles where it has been stagnant for thousands of years. This cold air rushed down over North America (I don't know that much about European or Asian weather patterns) in the last few years and resulted in the wierd jet streams and freak ice storms. Now that the stock of super-cooled air is about running out, the ice caps and permafrost are melting in earnest. This, in turn, is dumping a huge amount of fresh water into the oceans. No one really knows what effect this will have (other than raising sea level, obviously). The movie, The Day After Tomorrow suggests one possibility. Other than the fact that the movie is a bit sensational, the science is good and is a reasonable possibility, but no one really knows.

 

An interesting tidbit:

 

In The Day After Tomorrow, there is a scene where a student is in a museum looking at an exibit of a mammoth that was found in Alaska frozen in ice. They don't go into a lot of detail in the movie, but I read the original paper from that expedition while I was in college (I have an Ecology degree). They found the mammoth froozen in a block of ice and, initially, figured it had fallen into a crevice in aglacier and gotten trapped. As they examined it, they found two disturbing things: 1) It was frozen perfectly with no freezer burn. In fact, the sled dogs had mammoth steaks for dinner. 2) It had buttercups in its mouth and stomach.

 

#2 means that it was not on a glacier, but quietly eating in a green meadow just before it froze to death. #1 means that it was frozen at a temperature of less than 400 degrees Fahrenheit (the temperature required to freeze dry something of that size), getting close to absolute zero. The fact that it did not thaw in the intervening years before the researchers found it means that the local climate was markedly changed at the same time the elephant froze to death.

 

The original paper suggested the possibility of a freak volcanic erruption which released a cloud of pressurized CO2, thus freezing everything nearby solid (CO2 cools as it expands). The dust from the erruption could have cooled the climate for several years. The scenario in The Day After Tomorrow (mega-huricane caused by ocean current-shift pulling down super-cooled air from the stratosphere) is actually more plausible since it better explains the long-term change which would have been necessary to keep the carcass frozen that long.

 

Anyway, bottom line is no one really understands how the climate works and thererfore no one knows exactly what the long term effect will be, but it is not likely to be good for humans.

[organicbmx 0]

As far as science knows, the whole in the ozone layer is a natural occrance. One that is almost like a defense mechanisim for our atmosphere.

everyone need to not get confused. ozone and greenhouse are two very different things.

the process of 'global warming' natural or not is a defence mechanism that keeps the equilibrium of earth's climate


the hole in the ozone does no good - only serves to give those who live to the north or south of the world [argentina, australia, uk, sweden, north russia, north canada etc] skin cancer and damage our eye's. not fun. i live in dorset and when my dad was a child and before the mass use of cfc's he could go out pale in the summer and not burn his skin like we do today. its such a shame becasue now we have to wear loads of horrible sun lotion.

[Kid Saiyan 0]

Oddly enough, he's got it close to right. CFCs, which destroy the ozone layer, are *also* very effective greenhouse gases. It is not just CO2 which traps heat (infrared). Many of the common coolants are even better at trapping heat and harder to get rid of.

 

The CFCs are everywhere in the atmosphere, not just over the poles. The reason the ozone hole is over the poles is because the CFCs destroy ozone faster where there are large amounts of airborne ice crystals. For some reason, the chemical reaction happens faster on the surface of the ice.

 

Yes, greenhouse warming may very well trigger an ice age cooling effect. Not only that, but it can cause severe local cooling in the short term. Some of the winter storms we have had in the past several years may be attributed to this. Although *average* global temperatures are increasing, the overall effect is to make weather more chaotic. Deserts get deluged in rain, places with mild weather suddenly get very cold or very hot because of changing ocean or air currents.

 

One off the big effects we have already seen is the displacement of cold air masses over the poles. The excess heat caused by greenhouse warming pushes cold air away from the poles where it has been stagnant for thousands of years. This cold air rushed down over North America (I don't know that much about European or Asian weather patterns) in the last few years and resulted in the wierd jet streams and freak ice storms. Now that the stock of super-cooled air is about running out, the ice caps and permafrost are melting in earnest. This, in turn, is dumping a huge amount of fresh water into the oceans. No one really knows what effect this will have (other than raising sea level, obviously). The movie, The Day After Tomorrow suggests one possibility. Other than the fact that the movie is a bit sensational, the science is good and is a reasonable possibility, but no one really knows.

 

An interesting tidbit:

 

In The Day After Tomorrow, there is a scene where a student is in a museum looking at an exibit of a mammoth that was found in Alaska frozen in ice. They don't go into a lot of detail in the movie, but I read the original paper from that expedition while I was in college (I have an Ecology degree). They found the mammoth froozen in a block of ice and, initially, figured it had fallen into a crevice in aglacier and gotten trapped. As they examined it, they found two disturbing things: 1) It was frozen perfectly with no freezer burn. In fact, the sled dogs had mammoth steaks for dinner. 2) It had buttercups in its mouth and stomach.

 

#2 means that it was not on a glacier, but quietly eating in a green meadow just before it froze to death. #1 means that it was frozen at a temperature of less than 400 degrees Fahrenheit (the temperature required to freeze dry something of that size), getting close to absolute zero. The fact that it did not thaw in the intervening years before the researchers found it means that the local climate was markedly changed at the same time the elephant froze to death.

 

The original paper suggested the possibility of a freak volcanic erruption which released a cloud of pressurized CO2, thus freezing everything nearby solid (CO2 cools as it expands). The dust from the erruption could have cooled the climate for several years. The scenario in The Day After Tomorrow (mega-huricane caused by ocean current-shift pulling down super-cooled air from the stratosphere) is actually more plausible since it better explains the long-term change which would have been necessary to keep the carcass frozen that long.

 

Anyway, bottom line is no one really understands how the climate works and thererfore no one knows exactly what the long term effect will be, but it is not likely to be good for humans.

1064325019[/snapback]

As clear as this is, it is confusing... i cant understand it!

I learned differently in school...this is too much detail...could you 'dumb it down a little'?! please?

[Shadow X 0]

Global warming, to me, should be an easier issue than it is to solve. Nowadays, people are using so many chloroflorocarbons, aerosol cans, driving expensive cars and other pollutants.All these things are releasing pollutants (even as we speak), harmful gases, radiation waves, and other gases that are dangerous to the environment and the atmosphere.All these things are also inflicting the ozone layer with holes and breaks. This leads to sun burns and cancer which is yet another major issue in the world.I find the solution really easy, ban the use of cigars, aerosol cans, spray paints and things like that. Also the electric car is being invented, so once that's been released then there will be no more pollution from vehicles.Once all of these things have been done, them there won't be much of a greenhouse effect and global warming will hopefully be reduced and the world will be safer.Of course if there is no global warming then there will be less risk of the polar ice caps melting, less risk of flood damage and less people will get sun cancer.