Minimum Atmospheric CO2 percentage for plant life!

[Jacob]

Lush plant growth mean a more forest fires.

Does it? Not necessarily - lush growth means wet rain forest.

Or new opportunities

Presumably CO2 sequestration by electrolysis wouldn't make any sense unless there were massive amounts of green energy available to power it. Even if it was possible in the first place on a big enough scale.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrochemical_reduction_of_carbon_dioxide

 

[sawtooth-9]

Ok you got me. My assertion would be that this is an area of scientific research in which many people are working. Being an engineer and having a science based education I have witnessed the lengths which researchers go to to disprove the current thinking. Science thrives on the phrase, 'oh, that's interesting', it creates new avenues for research and study. The scientific method has to consider the inaccuracies and uncertainties in the data, statistics is utilised to understand if the data with these uncertainties supports an assertion/hypothesis, if it does not then a researcher has to stop and understand if these uncertainties can be reduced.

Your statement "And just how do you measure the temperature of a planet with sufficient accuracy to "worry" about a rise of 1.5 Deg and how did they measure it a few thousand years ago?" is an excellent one and one that any researcher will have had to work through. A simple Google search for "how do you measure the temperature of the earth?" returns a plethora of links, in the first one there is the statement "While global temperature is a simple enough idea, measuring it is harder than you might think. We take a look at how scientists measure global temperature." It is an understood problem for which methods have been developed. We are all free to research them and challenge them, and scientists themselves will have challenged them and will continue to challenge them, it's what science does. You have spotted the complexity of the issue, but then rather than explored how the issue has been addressed you've rather lazily jumped to the conclusion that it is unsolvable and therefore everything climate scientists publish is flawed.

I expect with some google research I could understand what has been studied regards the impact of urban concrete coverage on global warming, and is there is or is not substantive evidence (proof is not possible in science) regards cause an effect of warming and CO2 concentration. Although the burden of proof is on you for the statement "there is no substantive proof as to whether this is cause or effect."

We should all learn to think critically about what we are told/shown, and we have the best ever tools at our disposal to test/check/challenge. But to claim an alternative position or 'poo-poo' something we don't like without spending the time to research it is bad form. We all need to learn to argue through fact not emotion or opinion.

There is my carp,

Fitz

I have not jumped to any conclusion, lazily or otherwise. Simply questioning validity of the proposition.
There is also another correlation between the shifting magnetic pole and the apparent change in climate - Does it follow that there is a cause / effect relationship there ?
Correlation does not mean there has to be a casual connection - there just might be.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply

 

[bansobaby]

Me too. I just don't want to be here when it happens.
Apparently coastal environments are most likely to permit survival, due to littoral ecosystems and temperature moderation by the sea.
We are wondering about Blackpool.

You will need a snorkel....

 

[DrPhill]

Climate and CO2 levels have always varied together. During ice ages CO2 levels were low, and during warm periods CO2 was higher. In the Eocene (56-34 million years ago) there were no polar ice caps, temperatures were about 10ºC hotter than the 20th Century, and CO2 was about 1,500ppm (Westerhold et al. 2020, Rae et al. 2021). During the last Ice Age, CO2 varied between about 180 and 300ppm as ice sheets waxed and waned with orbital wobbles (Rae et al. 2021). CO2 was also about that level during the Paleozoic Ice Age, 340-290 million years ago (Foster et al. 2017).

Early attempts to estimate CO2 for that long ago in Earth’s past were broad-brush and very uncertain (eg Royer 2006), leading to the high CO2 estimates referred to in the myth. New data and refined techniques have since clarified the picture considerably. The 2006 estimates, for example, averaged data across 10-million-year timesteps, the 2017 data in the figure below used 0.5-million-year timesteps, and newer compilations don’t average across timesteps. At the same time, CO2 and temperature uncertainties have reduced considerably so that climates from the geological past are now a useful reality check for climate models (Tierney et al. 2020, IPCC 2021, see the intermediate version for more detail).

https://skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past.htm

 

[DrPhill]

This is a good resource : Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says

 

[Spectric]

Here is something to ponder, has the total mass of water on Earth changed over time. It might have changed state from warm seas to ice but is Earth a closed system so apart from a small amount lost by astronaunts then we are actually drinking dinosaur urine. If this is the case then total amounts of Co2 and Methane may not have changed mass, they were just stored somewhere following Earths volcanic and turbulent past so it is us who has released them but without means to store them again. This means that rising sea levels are catastrophic because we live here, but it just means we could end up back in a previous period of Earths history where it was just water.

https://astronomy.com/news/2020/03/ancient-earth-may-have-been-a-water-world-without-any-dry-land

 

[Molynoox]

This is a good resource : Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says

That's a really nice resource. I like the summary table, followed clickable detail. In my opinion this type of hierarchial arrangement works great as a way to provide information on any topic.

 

[conrad]

I use this forum as I try to learn and there are/were some very helpful people on here who were willing to help the less informed.

I use it less these days as I find the content of less interest to me. The last question I asked on here regarding issues with my BS400 went pretty much unanswered.


To log on to the forum today and see this ******** apparently denying the damage we are causing to our planet just beggars belief.

 

[Jacob]

I use this forum as I try to learn and there are/were some very helpful people on here who were willing to help the less informed.

I use it less these days as I find the content of less interest to me. The last question I asked on here regarding issues with my BS400 went pretty much unanswered.


To log on to the forum today and see this ******** apparently denying the damage we are causing to our planet just beggars belief.

Er - you might have missed it but the link above is debunking climate change scepticism arguments. Maybe not obvious at first glance!
It claims to be sceptical about climate change scepticism and points to the real science instead.

https://skepticalscience.com/
What is a BS400?

 

[deema]

I use this forum as I try to learn and there are/were some very helpful people on here who were willing to help the less informed.

I use it less these days as I find the content of less interest to me. The last question I asked on here regarding issues with my BS400 went pretty much unanswered.


To log on to the forum today and see this ******** apparently denying the damage we are causing to our planet just beggars belief.

Wow, how ungrateful! I looked at your thread on your BS400, your question was vague, ‘I’ve got vibration’ without any attempt to identify where it might be coming from you got a number of considered replies to which you said you would attempt the suggestions when you returned home after a couple of weeks away. You haven’t updated to say whether your problem was fixed or not.

You had stated you had previously contacted Record Power and indicated that their help was ‘next to useless’. Sounds to me like you will never be happy with any help.

 

[selectortone]

What is a BS400?

Me: "It's a Record Power bandsaw."

Jacob: "No it isn't."

 

[DrPhill]

It might have changed state from warm seas to ice but is Earth a closed system so apart from a small amount lost by astronaunts then we are actually drinking dinosaur urine. I

Actually the Earth is not a completely closed system. Material from outer space keeps landing here.... the amounts are small proportionately, but maybe not negligible.

Scientists estimate that the Earth gains about 40,000 tonnes of material each year from the accretion of meteoric dust and debris from space. They also estimate that about 95,000 tonnes of hydrogen gas are lost from the Earth’s atmosphere to outer space each year.

From the BBC

 

[Inspector]

Helium is lost too.

Pete

 

[Spectric]

Material from outer space keeps landing here.... the amounts are small proportionately, but maybe not negligible.

Could that be offset by the amount of space junk and other stuff now orbiting the planet ?

Is Helium lost or does it become something else ?

 

[Gant]

Helium is too light to stay in the atmosphere. It floats off into space. As a very stable element it doesn’t change into anything else. Fun fact: helium is mined. It is a byproduct of radioactive decay and is found in some natural gas fields in rocks where uranium is relatively abundant. Since it leaves the atmosphere it’s a non-renewable resource that we are using too quickly; every time you see a few birthday balloons that’s one less MRI scan that will ever be performed.

 

[Spectric]

But we have enough radioactive waste like Uranium byproducts that might just keep our helium supply going. It is a shame we cannot tag our carbon waste onto Helium and let it just drift off into space.

 

[John Brown]

Without wanting to argue right now, I was under the impression that the helium used in balloons is not pure enough for most medical/scientific purposes. Could be wrong, but I do remember reading that.

 

[conrad]

Er - you might have missed it but the link above is debunking climate change scepticism arguments. Maybe not obvious at first glance!
It claims to be sceptical about climate change scepticism and points to the real science instead.

https://skepticalscience.com/
What is a BS400?

The fact that it is raised on here speaks volumes.
As for your question, the BS400 is a very common bandsaw. When I was green and bought into the Brittish made thing, I bought Record Power equipment, Now I know better, Its made in China. I don't buy it.

 

[Spectric]

Could be wrong, but I do remember reading that.

There are medical grade gases, so you are correct. Oxygen is a good common example where you get the oxygen bottle for welding and there is the medical grade for respiration so filling ballons with the more expensive grade of Helium would not make sense.

When I was green and bought into the Brittish made thing, I bought Record Power equipment, Now I know better, Its made in China. I don't buy it.

When you look around at woodworking machinery there is nothing not made or assembled from parts from Asia so there is no choice. The days of buy British went with the demise of the british manufacturing industry when someone pulled the flush.

There have been several threads with regards to asian goods and quality, the reason we get a bad impression of say Chinese quality is because our machinery companies like Record and Axminster are in control of the price they wish to pay to maintain their profit margins so it is us who are wanting lower cost goods that are influencing the quality. To highlight Chinese technology, if anyone saw the news the other night where the Chinese were playing so called war games around Taiwan you must have seen that there military is on par with anyone else when it comes to technology, replace the chinese people and you would have thought it was an American war game.

 

[Daniel2]

Helium is too light to stay in the atmosphere. It floats off into space. As a very stable element it doesn’t change into anything else. Fun fact: helium is mined. It is a byproduct of radioactive decay and is found in some natural gas fields in rocks where uranium is relatively abundant. Since it leaves the atmosphere it’s a non-renewable resource that we are using too quickly; every time you see a few birthday balloons that’s one less MRI scan that will ever be performed.

What utter bollocks...!!

ETA: The auto censor didn't allow me to express myself adequately in response to
the nonsense in the quoted post above.