Earth hour

[gobfish1]

all i know is, me google went black ... so i just logged off it ..

[CatB]

Originally Posted by Alun

Thanks for that CatB - that's the first time I've had a proper answer to that sort of question instead of a rant that I don't care about the baby rabbits that are going to die because the planet is too hot.

One question about absorbtion of CO2 though - given that 7/10 of the world's surface is water (according to the t-shirt manufacturers) Is there or has there been a large surge in unseasonal algae and other marine plant life growth since CO2 increase was noticed?

Also (serious question) has the mandatory fitting of catalytic converters to cars caused the biggest problem? What would happen if they were removed? Is carbon monoxide a bigger risk to public heath, would it be a benefit in the longer term due to lower CO2 emissions?

OK - firstly I wouldn't worry too much about the baby rabbits - history has shown that rabbits are a pretty adaptable species, they are low on my list of things likely to be wiped out by climate change

As to the oceans, currently the oceans themselves absorb a large proportion of the human generated (anthropogenic) CO2 emissions but in doing so the oceans are becoming more acidic. This CO2 increase might help some marine algae that build calcium carbonate shells or it might cause them huge problems - as far as I know one paper shows it going one way, one paper the other and a couple that seem suggest the effect depends on the species or is in some other way more complicated. Also, as the oceans absorb more CO2 they become more saturated with it and able to absorb less so an increasing proportion will remain in the atmosphere.

As far as I am aware no one has seem increased algal blooms due to increased CO2 - in large regions of the oceans algae growth is nutrient limited so CO2 increase would have no effect. This is why they are suggesting adding iron to waters in high latitudes to fertilise algae growth (I won't bore you with why I think this is a bad plan!!).

As to catalytic converters - I honestly have no idea, I hadn't heard that hypothesis before. As I understand it though they complete the oxidation of CO to CO2 and reduce nitrogen oxide to nitrogen and oxygen (but potentially mess that up and produce nitrous oxide which is in itself a nasty greenhouse gas). To be honest I would hope that the engines produce relatively little CO as it means the fuel is not being fully utilised so I can't see it's conversion to CO2 as having a huge impact on CO2 emissions but I can't find any numbers on this so I am willing to be corrected. I have no idea about the amount and effect of nitrous oxide. All that said, these were only introduced in the early 1990's and the ice core record gives us a rocketing level of atmospheric CO2 since the industrial revolution so they certainly aren't the 'biggest problem'. I think you need someone more qualified in the area of public health to answer the rest of that question!

[Richard Mason]

I did read a report, or see one on TV about CO2 fertilisation effects being responsibl;e for a big take-off in growth of certain woody weeds in the Outback here. These plants couldn't previously manage here 50 odd years ago but the added CO2 has made them more resistant to dry conditions.

[Dr T]

did it happen then ??

not quite sure i noticed or remembered !!

mind you it is 6pm and i only just remembered the clock change !!


a

[Darren A]

Originally Posted by Dr T

mind you it is 6pm and i only just remembered the clock change !!


a

Me too, kids missed their swimming lesson, and Mrs Darren A was late for work

[Jay_Benson]

If the "bunny huggers" are right then using less fuel may allow us to reduce the impact of global warming and if they are wrong then it will mean that the fuel lasts longer.

Also we might as well reduce the amount of fuel we use for 2 good reasons:

1) it costs so much
2) if there is a global climatic catastrophe then the bunny huggers will be unbearable with their "I told you so".

- I can't see a bunny to hug so the cat will have to do for now.

[John63]

A lot of fuel in temperate climates is used for heating, so if the worls warms up does that mean that we will start using less fuel?

Also, if the world does become warmer, the masses from the temperate climtaes will then be living in sub tropical /tropical regions so wouldn't need to go on holiday as much, saving on airline fuel costs.

A warmer world would lead to an increase in humidity. This in turn would lead to more rain so less desert areas and more fertile land for crops.

can anyone see a downside to this?

[Jay_Benson]

Originally Posted by John63

A lot of fuel in temperate climates is used for heating, so if the worls warms up does that mean that we will start using less fuel?

Also, if the world does become warmer, the masses from the temperate climtaes will then be living in sub tropical /tropical regions so wouldn't need to go on holiday as much, saving on airline fuel costs.

A warmer world would lead to an increase in humidity. This in turn would lead to more rain so less desert areas and more fertile land for crops.

can anyone see a downside to this?

The jungles dry up and die so inceasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere when they are either burnt or rot down driving more climate change and the change accelerates. This will lead to the creation of more deserts.

The increase in temperature will not necessarily warm places up as, for instance, the gulf stream fails the temperatures in the UK will drop dramatically in winter leading to increased fuel useage. The rains will become more extreme and so there will be flooding more often.

As for the more water going onto the the deserts - there is not exactly a huge amount of nutrition available to any seeds that are in the desert (not that there will be many of them) and so they may do OK for a one off but there is insufficient to have a sustained jungle - that takes many lifetimes to come.

Mankind will adapt, as will many other species, but there will be a widespread loss of a huge number of species in terms of both flora and fauna. This has already started and whilst it is not the first time it has happened previously it has been down to unavoidable issues such as meteorite strikes rather than the actions of a single species.

[John63]

Hi Jay,

my post was supposed yo be tongue in cheek. Sorry if it didn't come across that way.

Originally Posted by Jay_Benson

The jungles dry up and die .

why woud they dry up and die. Warmer wetaher and rising sea level would create higher humidity. Granted, the jungles might be cut by man for logging, clearing space for habitation etc which would have a detrimental effect on the jungle ecosystem.

Originally Posted by Jay_Benson

The increase in temperature will not necessarily warm places up as, for instance, the gulf stream fails the temperatures in the UK will drop dramatically in winter leading to increased fuel useage.

Correct for UK but nor everywher is warmed by the gulf stream.(are they?). These may become warmer. For thise living in UK, best do that ice diving course or buy a set of skis.

Originally Posted by Jay_Benson

As for the more water going onto the the deserts - there is not exactly a huge amount of nutrition available to any seeds that are in the desert (not that there will be many of them) and so they may do OK for a one off but there is insufficient to have a sustained jungle - that takes many lifetimes to come.

I've lived in the middle east for over eight years and every winter after a day or two of rain, there are green shoots all over. In winters with prolonged periods of rain, there cn be carpets of soft green grass everywhere. The problem in desert areas is prolonged periods with a lack of water (typically Feb-Dec)
My garden (watered but not fed or fertlised) has masses of tropical plants similar to those in SE Asia (sorry apart from the bouganvilia and plams I have no idea what they are). This appears to be self sustaining. If this happens in my garden why not over a larger area if left to nature? Given the rate of growth that I see each winter, I can see no reason why this wouldn't happen in years not lifetimes

Originally Posted by Jay_Benson

Mankind will adapt,.

Hope so otherwise we are all buggered.

Originally Posted by Jay_Benson

as will many other species, but there will be a widespread loss of a huge number of species in terms of both flora and fauna. This has already started and whilst it is not the first time it has happened previously it has been down to unavoidable issues such as meteorite strikes rather than the actions of a single species.

Agreed in as much as that is what most of the models and projections indicate. Like most people I have no desire to se anymore species disappear and feel that action needs to be taken NOW. If we all do a little.....


Cheers, John

[dry suit diver]

while China, India and a lot of other countries do feck all and we still end up with a broken planet??


we all know that however much we do the effects will be negated by the 3 big pollluters within minutes.

I drive a big 4x4 that chucks out ooodles of Co2 it can run on biodiesel and when the UK is covered in snow I will be able to drive places



BTW I do as much as I can to be green, the loft is very nearly full of nsulation we have A rated washing machine A rated condensing combi boiler we have all lamps as low energy we recycle 90% of the waste ( three weeks and only half a wheelie bin compared to needing to get extra boxes for recycling. we turn off all electrical equipment so its not on standby, the graph that EDF attach to the bills show how much we are saving in energy each quarter compared to last years figures ad we have cut 1/4 off usage with some simple measures.