Climate change

[James Deuce]

Your point seems to reflect many of the other nay sayer brigade posts and I somewhat disagree with it. There has been a project going on around the planet that has been testing ice core samples. They now have temperature and weather conditions going back a few thousand years, and also methane and C02 levels going back 650k years. In one of the following examples there is a statement that backs your generic cyclic argument (which I notice you cite no references to back up)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...home-headlines
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/monsoon.htm
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...05/1009/NEWS07
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/thompcon.htm

This one is a good one
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/bullet...52047/2b86c112

etc.

I do notice the nay sayers seem to either misquote or forget to reference. I wonder why that is ?

Oh, I see you want references. Wasn't aware I was required to provide APA referencing an a biker site.

[WINJA]

im not confused at all , note i said montreal protocol not kyoto , i was talking about climate change , do you think the hole in the ozone layer is not relevant , the same people talking shit about the greenhouse effect are the same ones talking shit about the ozone layer

[Skyryder]

note the government will always back the science that nets the most tax , the cfc levy is pathetic , they taxed r22 with 1/10 the odp of r12 or r11 at the same rate , then they took no initiatives with the money instead throwing most of it into the consolidated fund.
who sponsors the science is also important , ie if dupont funds ozone research , then the scientist find cfcs are ruining the ozone layer dupont then lobbys the governments who sign the montreal protocol all the time dupont has waiting in the wings a new line up of refrigerants which gives them the same stronghold they had in the market that they had when the first introduced cfcs and hcfcs years ago , and they new it was coming so had 5 years of research ahead of allied signal , rhodia and ici etc , what a fucken crock.
the governments scream about the enviroment yet they wont regulate the aircon and refrigeration industries , its all about the mighty dollar.

Cynical but can't say I can fault your hypothosis. This from

http://www.ciesin.org/docs/003-077/003-077.html

it's lengthy and seems to backup your claim.

**********

In the end, the negotiators agreed to cap their use of HCFCs in January 1996 at a level equal to the sum of their HCFC use in 1989 and 3.1 percent of the level of their use of CFCs in 1989. This formula acknowledges both the considerable existing uses of HCFCs and their role as transition substitutes for CFCs. Subsequent to that, the parties agreed to reduce their use of HCFCs by 35 percent by 2004, by 65 percent by 2010, by 90 percent by 2015, by 99.5 percent by 2020, and by 100 percent by 2030. (22) The relatively late date of 2030 for the final phase out can be at least partially explained by the political clout of those who were supporting the arguments cited above--namely, industry and the United States. Industry's representatives were out in force in Copenhagen. In fact, there were three times as many industry delegates as delegates of nonindustry nongovernmental organizations. Moreover, by sending seven employees to the preparatory meeting in Copenhagen, DuPont had at least as many representatives (if not more) than all but six of the countries. (23)

The U.S. delegation also had a particular interest in securing this timetable because the country would be particularly hindered by a more imminent phase out of HCFCs. The largest pieces of equipment that use HCFCs are the air conditioners that cool office buildings. The country that makes the most use of these large machines is the United States. Because these air conditioners have economic lifetimes of up to 40 years, business people want to ensure that they will be able to keep them operational throughout this period. (24) The 0.5-percent usage allowed between 2020 and 2030, which the U.S. delegation demanded and received, guarantees these machines' continued utility. Although the history of the ozone layer debate suggests that the phase out dates for HCFCs will be brought forward, it may be that the United States and others will be able to qualify such uses of HCFCs as "essential" in the future. Regardless, U.S. determination prevailed in Copenhagen because resistance by Europe, in particular, was hindered by intra-European Community squabbling during the proceedings. (25)

***********

I've highlighted the relevent section that your post implies.

Skyryder

[WINJA]

i was thinking of starting a business disposing of cfc and hcfc , simply by exporting the stuff to one of our local island nations who did not sign the treaty, paying the local government a nominal fee and just venting it to atmospere .


cfc's are still in production , pharmaceutical manufacturers still use it in asthma inhalers . theres some out there using 134a as a propelent , but this may have a link to cancer , some of these refrigerants are very dangerous , firstly mustard gas was made from burnt r12 , and worse i used a gas in oz that was so dangerous that when i welded in its presence it fucked all the stainless and copper in the area , it also made my skin peel where it was exposed .
whats really funny is some of this gas is being put into highrise a/c not in centralized plant, so in the event of a fire it will kill you before you can make it to the fire exit

[rogson]

I'd vote if I could vote neither.

[Biff]

Climate change is definitely happening. The evidence is overwhelming. As has already been stated, there is also some evidence that the earth's climate changes naturally over a pretty much constant and predictable cycle. However, the alarming fact lies in the fact that not only does the earth's climate appear to be changing much faster than predicted, but that certain nations/people use the fact that the earth's climate changes anyway to say, "fk it. I'll continue polluting and do fk all about it. It's gonna happen anyway etc etc ". Which IMO, is a crock of shite.

Evidence shows that the earth’s climate is changing faster and more severely than predicted. In addition the sea is cooling, which in turn effects winds, currents, weather, sea saline levels etc. Using the, "it's gonna happen anyway" line is narrow minded, selfish, inconsiderate, and bloody dangerous IMO.

Oh yeah - the earth was flat until a few hundred years ago when we thought we were so clever and knew everything. A few hundred years from now, when science advances yet further, our ancestors (should there be any around...) will also be thinking that we were as thick as shite to believe what some people/nations do today.

[Skyryder]

Climate change is definitely happening. The evidence is overwhelming. As has already been stated, there is also some evidence that the earth's climate changes naturally over a pretty much constant and predictable cycle. However, the alarming fact lies in the fact that not only does the earth's climate appear to be changing much faster than predicted, but that certain nations/people use the fact that the earth's climate changes anyway to say, "fk it. I'll continue polluting and do fk all about it. It's gonna happen anyway etc etc ". Which IMO, is a crock of shite.

Evidence shows that the earth’s climate is changing faster and more severely than predicted. In addition the sea is cooling, which in turn effects winds, currents, weather, sea saline levels etc. Using the, "it's gonna happen anyway" line is narrow minded, selfish, inconsiderate, and bloody dangerous IMO.

Oh yeah - the earth was flat until a few hundred years ago when we thought we were so clever and knew everything. A few hundred years from now, when science advances yet further, our ancestors (should there be any around...) will also be thinking that we were as thick as shite to believe what some people/nations do today.

Re your sig.

There is now Biff. Time for a sig change ol' son.

[crazyxr250rider]

The climate has been changing since earth developed an atmosphere
global warming causes disruption causes ice age ice age gets melted away by
global warming,global warming causes disruption........................................ ................................................. This sequence has been going on for ever...........
Primitive humans survived the last ice age which is a strong confermation that we can survive this one in say 50-200 years
and many companies ALREADY have hydrogen cars ready for when fosil fuel runs out in fact one buisness man in with the UN and so on was going to put 10 billion of his own into bringing out his own hydrogen car and station network before 2007, but went to work one day and was never seen again.
dosn't take a scientist to work out why that eventuality was reached and I am shure a oil company had somting to do with it!

[Biff]

The climate has been changing since earth developed an atmosphere
....

Dude - you're missing a key point. There were no heavy industries, gas guzzling cars and cheap hairspray around in the early days of civilisation. We had an ozone layer that protected us against UVs. Today - now that we've contributed to the significant weaknening of the ozone layer's effectiveness, even putting bloody holes in the thing - we're running the risk of getting to the point where the planet may not be able to heal itself naturally in either our own or our children's generation, or possibly ever.

Don't hide behind the," it's gonna happen anyway" crap. It's not gonna happen anyway - at least not in the way that it's happened in the past. Scientific fact mate. Not idle gossip.

Re your sig.

There is now Biff. Time for a sig change ol' son.

True. Such a shame - but true.

[Colapop]

Those people I left in the lift this morning would've been hoping for a climate change - *Someone open a window....*

[vifferman]

I know one thing: If, in 50 years time when we are either frozen or being baked, the "experts" will still be producing scientific studies showing that the opposite is happening.

That's why they've now switched to calling it "global climatic change".
And as Jim the # 2 says, the period of measurement is too small, and the data pool too tiny to draw any definite conclusions.
And as I say, variations in climate due to 'natural' causes (wobble of the Earth's axis, variations in orbit, volcanic activity, whales farting) are so much greater than other causes (such as variations in CO2 levels etc. due to human influences) as to completely swamp those, making attribution to this cause or that factor totally spurious.

In any case, all it takes is another volcanic eruption the size of Taupo or Mangakino and we're fookd anyway.

Climate change is yet another bandwagon for the media to fuel and drive around, and for 'scientists' to get tickets for in order to achieve funding.

[k14]

Random side step here, but i saw skyrider talking about co2 getting pumped underground to old oil resivoirs, i reckon thats a dam good idea seeing as we have a pretty massive resivoir just off the coast of taranaki that is nearly empty. Coal fired power station anyone?

Another random fact, I work at the place that takes the co2 out of the gas that's mined out of the ground in taranaki. We vent about 10% of the co2 removed from the gas to the atmosphere and the rest gets recovered and sold to other companies for a use that most people will be surprised to know. Green rep to who can guess what its used for.

[WINJA]

random side step here, but i saw skyrider talking about co2 getting pumped underground to old oil resivoirs, i reckon thats a dam good idea seeing as we have a pretty massive resivoir just off the coast of taranaki that is nearly empty. coal fired power station anyone?

another random fact, i work at the place that takes the co2 out of the gas that's mined out of the ground in taranaki. we vent about 10% of the co2 removed from the gas to the atmosphere and the rest gets recovered and sold to other companies for a use that most people will be surprised to know. green rep to who can guess what its used for.


---------------------------------------
coca cola , welding, new refrigerant in a cascade system

[k14]

coca cola , welding, new refrigerant in a cascade system

yeah too easy aye. was quite surprised actually, they've just had to double the capacity of co2 processing to keep up with the demand. who'd have known that beer/fizzy drinks takes up so much co2.

[wendigo]

Climate changes all the time, and the stimulus for change is manifold.

How do you make O3? In the upper atmosphere, instense bursts of solar radiation create an environment where some O2 atoms split and others attract the free O atom. We went 27 years without major solar flares, or solar storms, from the late '60s to the early '90s. The depleted Ozone layer was latched onto by the Green movement as a sign that man-made pollutants were breaking the ozone layer down. Rather than it being broken down, it wasn't being built up. As a free molecule CFCs for instance are too heavy to reach the upper atmosphere. Combined with the effects of a non-regenerating Ozone layer was the MT Pinatubo sulfate aerosol effect. The depletion of the Ozone layer accelerated rapidly after that eruption, and I rather suspect that we are still experiencing climate effects generated by it.

On the other hand Chlorine in the lower troposhere is a contributor to creating ground level ozone.

In the Stratosphere the reactions are approximately:

(1) O₂ + UV (@~254 nm)--> O^. + O^.;
(2) O^. + O₂ -->O₃;
(3) O₃ + UV-B (or UV-A) --> O₂ + O^.;
(4a) O₂ + O^. --> O₃
(4b) O^. + O^. --> O₂

so essentially we have the dynamic reversible reaction:

(5) 3O₂ <--> 2O₃;

which is at equilibrium, and who's fortunate side effect (for us) is that it absorbs solar radiation of wavelengths < ~320nm.

The fun starts when we introduce CFC's, chlorocarbons BrFC's etc . We then get the series of reactions:

(6) (CFC) + UV --> (CFC)^. + Cl^.
(7) Cl^. + O₃ --> ClO^. + O₂
(8) ClO^. + O --> Cl^. + O₂

The net result of reactions (7) & (8) is that ozone and the O^. used to make ozone in reaction (2) is converted to O₂, while the chlorine radical is regenerated to be reused in equation (7). This means that the balance of reaction (5) is moved towards the right, which means there is less ozone & thus higher levels of UV radiation reach ground level.
Painfull as it may be to admit it, the Greens are actually correct if they have stated that man made polutants (speciffically Chloro, Bromo or Fluoro carbon) compounds) have led to the depletion of the Ozone layer. There is no argument over this. The real argument is over how much man made pollutants have shifted the balance of reaction (5), and it is in this that the Greens are a bunch of sensationalist lyin' bastards.

"As a free molecule CFCs for instance are too heavy to reach the upper atmosphere" - You're actually just as bad the Green movement here, this statement is erroneous and misguiding (or 'bullshit' in the vernacular).

" Combined with the effects of a non-regenerating Ozone layer " - see comments above - the ozone layer is continually regenerating - and continually being destroyed.

"On the other hand Chlorine in the lower troposhere is a contributor to creating ground level ozone." - true, but once again man made pollutants, in this case VOC's (Volatile Organic Compounds ) & NOX (Nitrous Oxides), have had a significant impact on this also, once again shifting the balance of low level ozone.


Rgrds