Slashdot Mirror
Carbon Releases in Asia
ninthwave writes "After previous discussions on global warning, I thought I would post some interesting research in the affects of forest fires and drought in Asia on carbon output. The Guardian has this article. More detailed information can be found in these articles from
Leicester University
and the
BBC"
I work on this type of stuff and I think it's to early to determine anything on the subject at the moment. I don't usually say this but it's true in this circumstance.
We have government officials (Bush) that think they know everything, that's the dangerous thing
I know I'm going to get flamed for this. But we Human beings are part of the ecosystem. As opposed to watching over it. If we were to pollute the earth and kill ourself off. In a millennia or so the ecosystem would cylcle and bring forth a whole plethora of new species. I'm not saying we should do as we want. But I do think peopel should just admit we are protecting our own posterity and not "mother earth" As george carlin used to say all the earth has to do is shake us off like flees. Balancing our use of resources so that it doesn't affect the environment is more to protect us.
While some of that carbon was emitted as soot and other particles that will eventually come out of the air, that's still a lot of carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere.
That is in addition to what started the problem, which was using fire to clear land for farming.
It was recently noted that the planting of forests to be carbon sinks is actually detrimental for the first 10 years, as disturbing the soil to do the planting released 10 years worth of carbon dioxide into the air.
Add to this the push to use more coal in the U.S. as part of the national energy policy (coal is nearly pure carbon, and thus releases more greenhouse gas than, say, natural gas, which has hydrogen as a major energy contributor).
It seems like the problems are going to get worse before they get better. We need to put a lot of effort into clean and renewable energy -- make it affordable, instead of relying on the altruism of those who run their cars on biodiesel or solar electricity and install compact fluorescent lights. It's one thing to try to legislate a solution -- but using economics to solve the problems is more likely to work.
Free book: Science Toys You Can Make
I'm not conviced that our global warming trend has anything to do with the greenhouse effect.
Does anyone think that maybe, just MAYBE, that thermal emissions from our inefficient machines just might have an effect on the one-degree-over-a-century global change that the EPA has researched?
Perhaps that the effect of 6 billion humans breathing in 70 degree air and breathing it out at 98 degrees JUST MIGHT have a noticeable effect in populated areas?
That cars setting small portions of air on fire for extended periods of time perhaps could increase the air temperature just a little bit?
That factories, air-conditioners, heaters, and power plants, due to their less than 100% efficiency, might be emitting heat as a byproduct?
Could this possibly explain global warming? That we constantly find new ways to harness the suns energy to work for us, and the byproduct is always heat?
Maybe I'm just a wacko, but this seems a lot more reasonable than a minute change in atmospheric gases.
If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
this is not opinion...
o ls /
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/Aeros
just look for yourself. Asia and the Euros take the cake for winter-time pollution because they have no effective way of running clean heating sources... they are the ones who are fscking up the environment, not the US.
If instead of implimenting the Kyoto Protocols they simply spent time cleaning up the air NEAR Kyoto, then they'd actually be doing something..
but, as usual, its news to everyone except for those that look at the facts that the US and Canada does more to ACTUALLY protect the environment than a whole room full of UN Anti-Americanists TALK about protecting it.
Just go look for yourself - and tell me where the dirty air is and is not and at what times of the year....
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
Is this really anything all that new? I mean, havent fires been occuring since the dawn of time? Im not denying the fact that a climate change occured, but Im thinking that it isnt anything that we should worry about. Do climate records exist that date back far enough so that an accurate comparison of carbon levels and the resulting effects may be made? Whos to say that the earth is or is not experiencing normal or even below normal levels of carbon in the atmosphere? Without a larger collection of information, can we really make an accurate judgement?
Europe and the United states went through their own industrial ages where lots of forests were cleared, lots of pollution was injected into the environment. We know more about the devastating effects of pollution now, but what right do we have to tell developing nations that they should not grow as quickly? Rather, I believe we should make every effort to assist them in growing quickly in an environmentally conscious manner.
It's arrogant to think that we can destroy the planet. We can make it inhospitable to humans (destruction of arable farmland, poisoning of waters). We can make it more expensive (increased cooling costs, increased food costs, deleterious effects on health leading to increased medical costs, etc.). But if all humans die out then other species will take our place. Maybe it'll be armadillos. Maybe cockroaches.
There's a need to balance environmental responsibility with progress and the economy and the current lifestyles. Lots of people talk about being environmentally conscious but don't want to give up their six computers, SUVs, air conditioning, etc.. Think globally, act locally... Many debates seem entirely polarized around the two camps with few people taking the middle ground. The arguments often go along the lines that choosing the middle ground is akin to joining one of the camps or that the other camp is so extremist that it forces extremism in this camp. Blah blah blah.
I was surprised to learn that burning coal seams in China contribute nearly as much greenhouse gases as all of the cars in the US. (http://www.discover.com/oct_99/break.html).
I agree with you, although I think that we have reached the point where it will be very difficult for the Earth to get rid of us. We are already surviving in hostile environments where we do not belong. Any climate changes that the earth can dish out will be unlikely to kill us off. It might reduce the population by 99%, but there will probably always be some small communities somewhere eeking out a living in a niche environment.
Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.