King Canute returns

[Badjelly]

The mid-Atlantic trench spews out more C02 in a year than mankind has in its existence.

Can you point me to any evidence for that claim?

[Badjelly]

You just wait until little Finn's balls develop, then it'll be lil Lucy's ring that gets the run around. He'll sort the bitch out.

He's already giving it a damned good try.

Funnily enough, my dog is called Finn too.

It's a good name for a dog.

[Badjelly]

You are right, it is. But insulting Finn is too much fun.

When are you going to start?

Now come on, Finn. All these people are jumping in to cry foul when the meanie greenies attack you. The least you could do is pretend to be just a little bit hurt.

[Magua]

Do we have to have one of these threads every month? :P

Oh, and I loled at this.

The science is clear and conclusive and the impacts can no longer be ignored.

[Badjelly]

The mid-Atlantic trench spews out more C02 in a year than mankind has in its existence.

The British Geological Survey reckons mid-ocean ridge volcanism emits 66-97 Mt/yr CO2

http://tinyurl.com/lmd36w

Human emissions are about 26 GT/yr CO2 (too lazy to look up a source for that right now, but I could do if you want).

M = million, G = 1000 million.

[James Deuce]

Some science.
This one is a paper on using deep sea basalt for CO2 storage, and discusses the mechanisms that nature uses to store CO2. Natural CO2 production is immense, but the literature is really clouded thanks to Al Gore's Oscar winning lie-fest. 750 Billion tonnes on the sea floor of the Atlantic.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=2464617

It does beg the question about balance, but we're not qualified to comment on global climate balance. Simply not a big enough verifiable sample of data collection

Remember the crap weather in the '90s? Aerosol suspension of sulphuric acid from the Mt Pinatubo eruption was largely responsible for that, not CO2. It reflects sunlight, which interupts the La Nina, ElNino cycles, which in turn spazzes out phytoplankton product, whihc in turn buggers up Oceanic CO2 scrubbing and so on. Krakatoa was vastly worse for the climate, but the Greenies won't let you use volcanoes as bad guys because they simply can't compete on the CO2 production figures, as compared to humans. 150-200 million tonnes of CO2 per year compared to 2-6 billion for humans (note the precise figures cadged from the Greenpeace site).

Right on the cusp of the Industrial age, Northern Europe was on the verge of an Ice Age. The Sunspot cycle is normally 11 years. We went 27 years from the late 60s without significant sunspot activity. Sattelite comms took off during that period and people were deeply put out when that burst of solar activity 2 years ago blew up one of Sky's major satellites and a couple of GPS birds.

The biggest problem we face is food packaging and the billions of tonnes of CO2 used to make it, and the mountains of crap in landfills as a result. Stop eating packaged, processed food for a start. I don't mean start eating filthy organic crap, I mean don't buy it if it is in plastic.

I'm serious about not using Electricity. There's a perception that NZ is largely Hydro powered. Given the state of the Sth Is - Nth Is link, I'd be surprised if the major supply for the Nth Island wasn't a combination of Coal, Oil amd Geothermal in Winter. I may be wrong.

[James Deuce]

The British Geological Survey reckons mid-ocean ridge volcanism emits 66-97 Mt/yr CO2

http://tinyurl.com/lmd36w

Human emissions are about 26 GT/yr CO2 (too lazy to look up a source for that right now, but I could do if you want).

M = million, G = 1000 million.

That figure is contestable and even Greenpeace don't subscribe to the Giga-tonne figure. Vulcanism is NOT the only source of CO2 from the mid-atlantic. SImple plate tectonics release large volumes of CO2 as the plates move apart. CO2 is suspended in all sorts of different ways.

[Finn]

(too lazy to look up a source for that right now, but I could do if you want).

Typical greenie. Go on, work for the dole...

[oldrider]

Typical greenie. Go on, work for the dole...

Dole?......Bet he is a state school teacher, legally poisoning the minds of our little kids!

[Badjelly]

That figure is contestable and even Greenpeace don't subscribe to the Giga-tonne figure. Vulcanism is NOT the only source of CO2 from the mid-atlantic. SImple plate tectonics release large volumes of CO2 as the plates move apart. CO2 is suspended in all sorts of different ways.

If that figure (which figure?) is contestable, then contest it.

Even Greenpeace don't subscribe to what? Are you saying human emissions are much smaller than 26 GT/yr CO2? It's very much in line with other estimates I've seen.

If you think non-volcanic CO2 release from mid-ocean ridges is large, then by all means point to any evidence you have.

The CO2 from undersea geology theory (as an explanation for the rise in atmospheric CO2 in the last couple of centuries) still has a few difficulties though:

• Why now and never in the last 650,000 odd years?
• Isotope ratios suggest a fossil fuel or plant source
• Ocean-atmosphere CO2 flux has been estimated in several different ways and they all say down, not up.

[Badjelly]

Dole?......Bet he is a state school teacher, legally poisoning the minds of our little kids!

Nah, teaching's too much work.

[puddytat]

Cant understand why folk have a problem with wether,we are the ones to blame for Climate change or ,wether your a flat earther & belive its the planets ebb & flow of things....

The Fact is we are the only ones capable of doing anything about it.


If we dont,well.....

[Badjelly]

...150-200 million tonnes of CO2 per year compared to 2-6 billion for humans (note the precise figures cadged from the Greenpeace site)....

Sorry, didn't notice this earlier. I wouldn't go to a Greenpeace site for estimates of the global carbon budget. I'd go to BGS (British), NGDC (USA), IGNS (NZ) or IPCC and then I'd follow their links into the scientific literature if necessary.

But I think there's some confusion over mass of CO2 versus mass of carbon. Based on molecular weights 1 kg CO2 contains 0.273 kg C. So 26 GT CO2 is equivalent to 7.1 Gt C. I prefer to talk in terms of C, but the BGS report I linked to used CO2 so I followed that convention.

Actually I lied in the first paragraph, the place I'd go first is this page:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...an-activities/

[Badjelly]

Cant understand why folk have a problem with wether,we are the ones to blame for Climate change or ,wether your a flat earther & belive its the planets ebb & flow of things.... The Fact is we are the only ones capable of doing anything about it.

Actually it does make a difference, because if we didn't understand why recent climate change was happening, we...

• wouldn't know if it was likely to continue
• wouldn't know what's the most effective way of dealing with it

But we've pushed the gas composition of the atmosphere well outside the bounds it's been in for at least the last 650,000 years (probably more like 30-40 million) and we've got reason to believe this is going to have an effect. It's already had some effect, but it's what happens in the future that is the worry.

[James Deuce]

If that figure (which figure?) is contestable, then contest it.

Even Greenpeace don't subscribe to what? Are you saying human emissions are much smaller than 26 GT/yr CO2? It's very much in line with other estimates I've seen.

If you think non-volcanic CO2 release from mid-ocean ridges is large, then by all means point to any evidence you have.

The CO2 from undersea geology theory (as an explanation for the rise in atmospheric CO2 in the last couple of centuries) still has a few difficulties though:

• Why now and never in the last 650,000 odd years?
• Isotope ratios suggest a fossil fuel or plant source
• Ocean-atmosphere CO2 flux has been estimated in several different ways and they all say down, not up.

Bob McDavitt and Augie Auer are/were both discredited as non-believers, however they did point to a variety of climate change factors that were natural phenomena, and repeatedly pointed out that CFCs and CO2 were not the chief concern for climate change.

FOr every figure that gets quoted there is another source discrediting it elsewhere. 26 Giga Tonnes (or is it Tons - no one seems to know if the consistency of the source material that is easily available is anything to go by) is one of those, "it's so huge I'll believe it" numbers.