Don’t worry, just a little bump - $70 is just around the corner. Short traders just keep making those margin calls, mortgage the house if you have to. Fortunes await you! PO is for pansies and doomers. At $70 short some more ..... it is going back to $22 .... the world is awash with oil ........ reality has nothing to do with it, its all in those charts!!!!!!!!!!
Joined: May 24, 2004 Posts: 1913 Location: Richland Center, Wisconsin
Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 11:29 am Post subject: Waste News Headlines
Climate change is inevitable but somewhat mitigable, report says
WASHINGTON (June 15) -- Climate change is almost certainly inevitable, but curtailing emissions of greenhouse gases and planning methods for adapting may lessen the impact, according to a report released by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
"It´s important at the outset to realize that even if Draconian measures were taken to control greenhouse gas emissions immediately, the Earth is likely committed to some amount of warming and climate changes," said William E. Easterling, a professor of geography and agronomy at Penn State University and lead author of the report, "Coping with Global Climate Change: The Role of Adaptation in the United States," which was released June 15.
We´re already seeing changes take place, and more are likely, he said.
Sea levels could rise, threatening low-lying coastal areas; agricultural crop yields could rise early in the warming process but then sharply decline; and changes in precipitation, particularly in the western mountain ranges, could make it difficult to capture water in reservoirs, Easterling said.
The report is available online at www.pewclimate.org. _________________ --------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________
Same link as above, excuse the duplication.... _________________ --------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________
Last edited by EnviroEngr on Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
The movie, The Day After Tomorrow reviewed: What's After the Day After Tomorrow? _________________ --------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________
Joined: May 24, 2004 Posts: 1913 Location: Richland Center, Wisconsin
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 10:55 am Post subject: cut-not-pasted
There's a bunch missing here. Must remember what it was.... _________________ --------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________
Joined: May 24, 2004 Posts: 1913 Location: Richland Center, Wisconsin
Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:10 pm Post subject: More posted.
Ironically, I posted a bunch here again recently and it was wiped out "a second time". Is this a sign?
Silly English bed-wetting type I must be. _________________ --------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________
Joined: May 24, 2004 Posts: 1913 Location: Richland Center, Wisconsin
Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2004 6:16 pm Post subject: Removal of CO2 from the atmosphere
NASA develops software to assist with removal of CO2 from atmosphere
Sept. 7 -- NASA scientists have developed Internet software that can help government agencies, land managers, farm cooperatives and others predict how their activities will influence the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Researchers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration´s Ames Research Center, at Moffett Field, Calif., developed the CQUEST modeling software, which allows users to display, predict and analyze carbon dioxide changes in U.S. ecosystems, according to NASA.
The application uses what-if scenarios, enabling land managers to determine where and when planting trees, grass, or other vegetation will most effectively remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
The tool uses data and images from NASA satellites and sensors in its calculations.
Since 1990, carbon dioxide emissions have increased annually by about 1.2 percent, potentially accelerating climate change and speeding up global warming, according to NASA. The increase comes largely from industrial emissions and vehicles burning fossil fuels.
Congress in 1992 called for a voluntary program of carbon dioxide reduction using a credit trading system. CQUEST´s databases estimate how much carbon different types of ecosystems will absorb, which is essential to the success of carbon trading, according to NASA.
NASA´s CQUEST application is available on the Internet at http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/website/cquestwebsite _________________ --------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________
Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 3:07 am Post subject: Re: Removal of CO2 from the atmosphere
EnviroEngr wrote:
The application uses what-if scenarios, enabling land managers to determine where and when planting trees, grass, or other vegetation will most effectively remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
What utter codswallop! Vegetation may temporarily convert the carbon into cellulose, sugars, terpenes and other hydrocarbons. When these burn, rot, or otherwise decompose, then it returns to the atmosphere as CO2 or, much worse, CH4.
The carbon cycle is just that, a cycle. The average lifetime of a carbon atom "sequestered" from atmospheric CO2 is probably less than three or four years before it's back in thin air. Vegetative "sequestration" is a myth.
It is estimated that if you have a pasture with cattle grazing thereon, 20% of the carbon absorbed for growing the grass is re-emitted in the form of CH4 from cowpats and the cattle farting, oops, sorry, enteric fermentation. As CH4 has 25 -50 times the global warming potential of CO2, it can be seen that the nett effect is, say, 5 times negative, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.
Sorry, my initial phrase is wrong, it would be MUCH more accurate and appropriate had I used the popular term for male bovine excrement, but it would be less expressive turned into cow pie! _________________ Devil
Devil, I think you're both right and wrong on the matter of sequestration, and congratulate your writing (the first I've seen) on the conversion of CO2 to CH4 (Methane) by agribusiness.
Even without that conversion, carbon held in annual biomass crops can't be considered sequestered as it is part of the planet's annual carbon cycle.
Carbon held in trees may be discounted as being 'only' for say 150 years; or can be accounted, if it's part of a sustainable forest, as a potentially permanent stock. For example the Amazon rainforest, which holds a vast tonnage of carbon in wood above ground, is about 60 million years old so far.
The next major reservoir (which is again being hammered) is soil, whose growth (like that of new forests) has the potential to recover significant amounts of carbon from the atmosphere.
Planting deciduous woodland to steadily bank carbon during 150 years of its development will need additional motivations if its to happen on a relevant timescale.
If the silviculture known as 'Coppice & Standards' is applied
(where shelter belts are grown to maturity (Standards) around plots that are felled and regrown from the stump on say a 12 yr cycle (Coppice)
then an annual harvest is available while maintaining steady carbon banking in the roots, soil and standards. The plots of coppice also bank carbon but only to half the length of the harvesting cycle: i.e. an average of 6 yrs growth in this case. This much is traditional practice.
The further step I hope to see become commonplace is the conversion of that harvest into energy and carriers including Woodgas, Community Heating, Methanol and Power.
This not only offers the prospect of making carbon banking in the afforestation of hill-lands profitable, it would also displace fossil fuels' usage thus further controlling atmospheric carbon and aiding the restructuring of society post peak oil.
Joined: May 24, 2004 Posts: 1913 Location: Richland Center, Wisconsin
Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:07 pm Post subject: Ag Stats?
Are there any agricultural statistics to track the manifestation of climate change in real terms.
Somehow, soil depletion and microbiology decimation need to be controlled out and atmosphere correlated to yield changes. Has USDA or similar agency published such a study? _________________ --------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________
Even without that conversion, carbon held in annual biomass crops can't be considered sequestered as it is part of the planet's annual carbon cycle.
Carbon held in trees may be discounted as being 'only' for say 150 years; or can be accounted, if it's part of a sustainable forest, as a potentially permanent stock. For example the Amazon rainforest, which holds a vast tonnage of carbon in wood above ground, is about 60 million years old so far.
Yes, carbon put into the earth's atmosphere from fossil fuels is not a part of the evolved carbon cycle, its in addtion to it. 70% of the earth's C02 to O2 conversion takes place in the oceans by phyto-plankton. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 1 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
