cleantechnica.com— A team of UK scientists have discovered a natural process that could delay, or even end, the threat of global warming.
Jan 4, 2009View in Crawl 4
Lol so your anecdotal evidence really refutes any long-term trends that scientists have observed, comparing the sudden spike of the last 150 years to 200,000 year old data sets from petrified forests, or glacial carbon concentration.Oh wait, I forgot, any source that believes the climate change theory (99% of the worlds scientists and most of the world's media outlets) is funded by the "eco-terrorists."
What does the left have to gain by promoting environmental change, and abolishing capitalism? Tell me please. On the contrary, Exxon has social, economical, and political hegemony to lose, not to mention vast amounts of present and future capital. Heres a great article by the guarding that talks about "The denial industry" and relates it to years of "scientific" denial by the tobacco industry that proved the harmfulness of cigarettes.<a class="user" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/19/ethicalliving.g2">http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/19/ ...</a>
@MxM111 : You've misunderstood Anoxic Events completely. The Algae take in CO2, yes. The Algae sink, yes, removing said CO2 from the atmosphere. The Algal growth is usually inhibited by the availability of nutrients- they can only grow so long as there're sufficient nutrients available for their growth to continue. Once they hit that peak, they reach equilibrium with the resource flow, or start to die off.Dumping obscene quantities of nutrients into the Ocean would remove this barrier, meaning they'd continue growing to the point of saturation.Dead Algal Matter decomposes, using up Oxygen. Once this happens on a large enough scale, the region of Ocean concerned is effectively "stripped" of Oxygen in its lower levels, leaving large areas of Deeper Ocean effectively toxic.Of course, the bigger problems described in the article are brought about by runaway Global Warming. Which, if it happens, may trigger an Anoxic event no matter *what* we do.I highly doubt that we'd be capable of "seeding" the ocean to the extent required to help the situation. The entire Southern Ocean? One *eighth* of our yearly emissions? Oh, be still, my beating heart.
well the exponential growth of Green House gas emissions should stop after the next peak of the cost of oil and people will not be able to afford it. hopefully leaving the infrastructure intact.
frieddonutsJan 5, 2009
Lol so your anecdotal evidence really refutes any long-term trends that scientists have observed, comparing the sudden spike of the last 150 years to 200,000 year old data sets from petrified forests, or glacial carbon concentration.Oh wait, I forgot, any source that believes the climate change theory (99% of the worlds scientists and most of the world's media outlets) is funded by the "eco-terrorists."
kronzdiggJan 5, 2009
I am more afraid of an ice age I'm glad it may be heating up rather than cooling.
mxm111Jan 5, 2009
Anoxic events are completely opposite to what is described in the article. In the article you capture CO2 and produce O2 and carbon.
skantonJan 5, 2009
What does the left have to gain by promoting environmental change, and abolishing capitalism? Tell me please. On the contrary, Exxon has social, economical, and political hegemony to lose, not to mention vast amounts of present and future capital. Heres a great article by the guarding that talks about "The denial industry" and relates it to years of "scientific" denial by the tobacco industry that proved the harmfulness of cigarettes.<a class="user" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/19/ethicalliving.g2">http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/19/ ...</a>
funkywoodJan 6, 2009
Humans are PART of the earth and nature, moron.
airravenJan 7, 2009
@MxM111 : You've misunderstood Anoxic Events completely. The Algae take in CO2, yes. The Algae sink, yes, removing said CO2 from the atmosphere. The Algal growth is usually inhibited by the availability of nutrients- they can only grow so long as there're sufficient nutrients available for their growth to continue. Once they hit that peak, they reach equilibrium with the resource flow, or start to die off.Dumping obscene quantities of nutrients into the Ocean would remove this barrier, meaning they'd continue growing to the point of saturation.Dead Algal Matter decomposes, using up Oxygen. Once this happens on a large enough scale, the region of Ocean concerned is effectively "stripped" of Oxygen in its lower levels, leaving large areas of Deeper Ocean effectively toxic.Of course, the bigger problems described in the article are brought about by runaway Global Warming. Which, if it happens, may trigger an Anoxic event no matter *what* we do.I highly doubt that we'd be capable of "seeding" the ocean to the extent required to help the situation. The entire Southern Ocean? One *eighth* of our yearly emissions? Oh, be still, my beating heart.
Closed AccountDec 29, 2009
seconded.
Closed AccountDec 29, 2009
well the exponential growth of Green House gas emissions should stop after the next peak of the cost of oil and people will not be able to afford it. hopefully leaving the infrastructure intact.