Japan Says Screw Kyoto

[Amped]

Since the 2011 earthquake and tsunami disaster, Japan has – hopefully temporarily –increased its fossil fuel imports. Yet even before Fukushima, the country’s ghg emissions were on the rise, despite Kyoto targets.

http://asiancorrespo...pans-eco-plans/

Temporary increases are excuses we have been making for years. Cutting emissions is a pipe dream just like cutting the deficit. Best we can hope for is a slow increase in emissions.

[Jonger]

http://asiancorrespo...pans-eco-plans/

Temporary increases are excuses we have been making for years. Cutting emissions is a pipe dream just like cutting the deficit. Best we can hope for is a slow increase in emissions.

Until sea levels rise (substantially) or we have mid latitude warming... its going to be a tough sell. Negative NAO being a feature of pressure changes isnt making it apparent... Heck, the last 10 winters in SE Michigan minus the last one, have been colder and snowier then normal.... Good luck selling that.

You can complain until blue in the face and nothing will change unless its economically feasible.

[JBG]

http://asiancorrespo...pans-eco-plans/

Temporary increases are excuses we have been making for years. Cutting emissions is a pipe dream just like cutting the deficit. Best we can hope for is a slow increase in emissions.

I favor cutting emissions of poisons, not of non-poisons like CO²

[PhillipS]

I favor cutting emissions of poisons, not of non-poisons like CO²

If you honestly feel that CO2 is not poisonous - run your car in a closed garage for a couple of hours while you listen to your favorite tunes on the radio. Let us know how that works out.

I'm being facetious, of course - CO2 has been a known toxin for years.

If you just have to troll, don't be such a stupid one - at least be entertaining.

[ohleary]

If you honestly feel that CO2 is not poisonous - run your car in a closed garage for a couple of hours while you listen to your favorite tunes on the radio. Let us know how that works out.

I'm being facetious, of course - CO2 has been a known toxinfor years.

If you just have to troll, don't be such a stupid one - at least be entertaining.

I'll bite. CO2 is a known toxin in the same way that H2O is a known toxin. Both are poisonous and fatal in certain situations with large doses administered. But this isn't what the other poster was talking about. CO2 emissions aren't going to have any acute effect on anyone while some other emissions might.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Until sea levels rise (substantially) or we have mid latitude warming... its going to be a tough sell. Negative NAO being a feature of pressure changes isnt making it apparent... Heck, the last 10 winters in SE Michigan minus the last one, have been colder and snowier then normal.... Good luck selling that.

You can complain until blue in the face and nothing will change unless its economically feasible.

9 of the last 10 winters in SE Michigan have been below normal? Like Dec-Feb? That is hard to believe, I actually believe Michigan will see more general cold with more snow fall and less days with snow cover.

[Jonger]

9 of the last 10 winters in SE Michigan have been below normal? Like Dec-Feb? That is hard to believe, I actually believe Michigan will see more general cold with more snow fall and less days with snow cover.

That's a difficult combo to pull off... Who knows... Most of michigans average temps in winter are well below freezing except far southeastern corner. This was the first winter in a while that was obviously well below normal snowfall... I'll check with Josh, he has all the stats on snowcover in SE Michigan. I do believe there was at least 2 top snowcover years in the 2000-2010 period.

According to buoy data the average temp of Michigan has gone up 1.3 degrees since 1970...

[PhillipS]

I'll bite. CO2 is a known toxin in the same way that H2O is a known toxin. Both are poisonous and fatal in certain situations with large doses administered. But this isn't what the other poster was talking about. CO2 emissions aren't going to have any acute effect on anyone while some other emissions might.

You're on one level - almost anything is fatal in large enough doses - but CO2 causes toxic reactions far below a lethal dose.

An as for your statement that CO2 emissions aren't going to have any acute effect - how can you say that given all of the peer-reviewed research indicating that CO2 emissions are greatly altering the Earth's climate? Are you really denying the validity of mainstream AGW theories? Tens of thousands of people have died in heat waves in recent years, flooding and mudslides have killed thouands more - how much more acute can an effect be?

[johnc]

If you honestly feel that CO2 is not poisonous - run your car in a closed garage for a couple of hours while you listen to your favorite tunes on the radio. Let us know how that works out.

I think you have one too many O's there for that example.

This thread would also be an appropriate time to remind everyone that the Japanese are awesome.

[The_Global_Warmer]

That's a difficult combo to pull off... Who knows... Most of michigans average temps in winter are well below freezing except far southeastern corner. This was the first winter in a while that was obviously well below normal snowfall... I'll check with Josh, he has all the stats on snowcover in SE Michigan. I do believe there was at least 2 top snowcover years in the 2000-2010 period.

According to buoy data the average temp of Michigan has gone up 1.3 degrees since 1970...

Buoy data? You mean ssts or surface temps.

If winter hasn

[aslkahuna]

CO (Carbon MONoxide is what you get from car exhaust in an enclosed space and it's toxic. CO2 is the exhaust from our breathing and hence can't be used by the body and too much in an enclosed space will suffocate you due to lack of free Oxygen. CO2 is a necessary constituent of the atmosphere helping maintain a livable temperature regime but you can get too much of a good thing. Kyoto was doomed to failure anyway the moment they let China and India off the hook. Also too, it would have merely slowed the rate of CO2 increase not stopped it which is what is needed. We have close to 400 ppm of CO2 now in the atmosphere-you stop ALL human based CO2 emissions now and you will still have 400 ppm and will have for some time.

Steve

[johnc]

We have close to 400 ppm of CO2 now in the atmosphere-you stop ALL human based CO2 emissions now and you will still have 400 ppm and will have for some time.

President Skroob and Mega Maid could fix us up in a jiffy.

[johnc]

Temporary increases are excuses we have been making for years.

What suggestion do you have for the Japanese people considering the circumstances? They're not exactly thrilled about importing 400 godzillion tons of natural gas to make electricity, as it's completely wrecked their trade balance, but what other options are there?

This is where you have to balance your nice-to-haves with realities. No energy = no business = people digging through dumpsters, civil unrest, war, etc.

[JBG]

If you honestly feel that CO2 is not poisonous - run your car in a closed garage for a couple of hours while you listen to your favorite tunes on the radio. Let us know how that works out.

I'm being facetious, of course - CO2 has been a known toxinfor years.

If you just have to troll, don't be such a stupid one - at least be entertaining.

No, you have CO (poisonous) and CO² (harmless) mixed up.

[WeatherRusty]

I favor cutting emissions of poisons, not of non-poisons like CO²

CO2 is regarded as a pollutant, not a poison, as the proper backdrop for this discussion. That some people and groups seek to conflate the meaning is par for the course in this debate.

Pollutant definition:

any substance, as certain chemicals or waste products, that renders the air, soil, water, or other natural resource harmful or unsuitable for a specific purpose.

Accumulating atmospheric CO2 over natural background level is deemed by science to be unsuitable for the maintenance of a relatively stable climate.

[PhillipS]

No, you have CO (poisonous) and CO² (harmless) mixed up.

No, you're wrong and are the one mixed up. Both carbon dioxide CO2 and carbon monoxide CO are toxic and kill by asphyxiation. The OSHA exposure limit for CO2 is 5,000 ppm(0.5% by volume), and the OSHA exposure limit for CO is 50 ppm. Which indicates that CO is considerably more toxic than CO2 but either one will kill you.

A clear example of CO2's toxicity occurred at Lake Nyos in Cameroon. From the wikipedia article :

On August 21, 1986, possibly triggered by a landslide, Lake Nyos suddenly emitted a large cloud of CO

₂

, which

suffocated

1,700 people and 3,500 livestock in nearby towns and villages.

And here's a link to a Stanford paper "On the causal link between carbon dioxide and air pollution mortality", Jacobson 2008. Its abstract:

Greenhouse gases and particle soot have been linked to enhanced sea-level, snowmelt, disease, heat stress, severe

weather, and ocean acidification, but the effect of carbon dioxide (CO2) on air pollution mortality has not been

examined or quantified. Here, it is shown that increased water vapor and temperatures from higher CO2 separately

increase ozone more with higher ozone; thus, global warming may exacerbate ozone the most in alreadypolluted

areas. A high-resolution global-regional model then found that CO2 may increase U.S. annual air pollution

deaths by about 1000 (350–1800) and cancers by 20–30 per 1 K rise in CO2-induced temperature. About 40% of the

additional deaths may be due to ozone and the rest, to particles, which increase due to CO2-enhanced stability,

humidity, and biogenic particle mass. An extrapolation by population could render 21,600 (7400–39,000) excess

CO2-caused annual pollution deaths worldwide, more than those from CO2-enhanced storminess.

There is nothing harmless about CO2 - we are just able to tolerate low doses. The facts are very easy to look up. So please stop cutting and pasting denialist nonsense.

[Jonger]

CO (Carbon MONoxide is what you get from car exhaust in an enclosed space and it's toxic. CO2 is the exhaust from our breathing and hence can't be used by the body and too much in an enclosed space will suffocate you due to lack of free Oxygen. CO2 is a necessary constituent of the atmosphere helping maintain a livable temperature regime but you can get too much of a good thing. Kyoto was doomed to failure anyway the moment they let China and India off the hook. Also too, it would have merely slowed the rate of CO2 increase not stopped it which is what is needed. We have close to 400 ppm of CO2 now in the atmosphere-you stop ALL human based CO2 emissions now and you will still have 400 ppm and will have for some time.

Steve

Sequestration is advancing as well... I put a link up to a rubber material that could be attached to cell tower type structures, the amount of CO2 removed was 100 fold more then a tree in a very short amount of time.

We just need to stop CO2 emission, or sequester it faster then we pump it out.

[Jonger]

No, you're wrong and are the one mixed up. Both carbon dioxide CO2 and carbon monoxide CO are toxic and kill by asphyxiation. The OSHA exposure limit for CO2 is 5,000 ppm(0.5% by volume), and the OSHA exposure limit for CO is 50 ppm. Which indicates that CO is considerably more toxic than CO2 but either one will kill you.

A clear example of CO2's toxicity occurred at Lake Nyos in Cameroon. From the wikipedia article :

On August 21, 1986, possibly triggered by a landslide, Lake Nyos suddenly emitted a large cloud of CO

₂

, which

suffocated

1,700 people and 3,500 livestock in nearby towns and villages.

And here's a link to a Stanford paper "On the causal link between carbon dioxide and air pollution mortality", Jacobson 2008. Its abstract:

Greenhouse gases and particle soot have been linked to enhanced sea-level, snowmelt, disease, heat stress, severe

weather, and ocean acidification, but the effect of carbon dioxide (CO2) on air pollution mortality has not been

examined or quantified. Here, it is shown that increased water vapor and temperatures from higher CO2 separately

increase ozone more with higher ozone; thus, global warming may exacerbate ozone the most in alreadypolluted

areas. A high-resolution global-regional model then found that CO2 may increase U.S. annual air pollution

deaths by about 1000 (350–1800) and cancers by 20–30 per 1 K rise in CO2-induced temperature. About 40% of the

additional deaths may be due to ozone and the rest, to particles, which increase due to CO2-enhanced stability,

humidity, and biogenic particle mass. An extrapolation by population could render 21,600 (7400–39,000) excess

CO2-caused annual pollution deaths worldwide, more than those from CO2-enhanced storminess.

There is nothing harmless about CO2 - we are just able to tolerate low doses. The facts are very easy to look up. So please stop cutting and pasting denialist nonsense.

The average home has 2500ppm CO2 inside, so the chances of us being affected by outdoor CO2 is basically zero in regard to breathing. I think it takes 10,000ppm before dizziness sets in.