Removing carbon from Earth's atmosphere may not 'fix' climate change

Jul 28, 2023
1
1
10
Visit site
Removing carbon from Earth's atmosphere may not reverse devastating changes to weather patterns in vulnerable areas, a new study suggests.

Removing carbon from Earth's atmosphere may not 'fix' climate change : Read more
Clearly the study authors understood that the process of lowering the ongoing increase of CO2 concentration in the Earth's atmosphere will require more than a century of actions. I assume that they didn't take into consideration the following two warnings.

IPCC report: ‘now or never’ if world is to stave off climate disaster

UN chief: World has less than 2 years to avoid 'runaway climate change'
* Note that this statement was made 4.5 years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohannPopper
Nov 16, 2020
26
10
4,535
Visit site
it should have been obvious from the beginning that carbon removal would never make a dent in the amount required to lower Earth's temperature. Why? Because just one part-per-million of CO2 is 7.8 billion metric tons and the global technology is taking out a few million. A heavily subsided scam.
 
Feb 24, 2023
4
2
15
Visit site
Superstitious people have invaded science who shouldn't be scientists. If removing carbon doesn't immediately reverse heating, then carbon isn't responsible for heating. Nature js a mechanism. Computer sims aren't science. Nature isn't a goddess. And human intelligence and machines dominate nature. Period. The loss of the Soviet ideology in this respect is an incalculable loss. The west today and its satellites are just a degenerate anti-materialist set of cults designed to keep workers afraid of thunder and themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Macadoodle
Feb 24, 2023
4
2
15
Visit site
it should have been obvious from the beginning that carbon removal would never make a dent in the amount required to lower Earth's temperature. Why? Because just one part-per-million of CO2 is 7.8 billion metric tons and the global technology is taking out a few million. A heavily subsided scam.
A Wright Flyer wasn't a "scam" on the path to a Concord. Cynical anti-human, anti-technology nonsense.
 
Jul 28, 2023
1
0
10
Visit site
Superstitious people have invaded science who shouldn't be scientists. If removing carbon doesn't immediately reverse heating, then carbon isn't responsible for heating. Nature js a mechanism. Computer sims aren't science. Nature isn't a goddess. And human intelligence and machines dominate nature. Period. The loss of the Soviet ideology in this respect is an incalculable loss. The west today and its satellites are just a degenerate anti-materialist set of cults designed to keep workers afraid of thunder and themselves.
You should re-read your post from a third person perspective and then advise what post sounds like propaganda. Logical arguments and scientific facts show rational thinking.
 
Nov 16, 2020
26
10
4,535
Visit site
Superstitious people have invaded science who shouldn't be scientists. If removing carbon doesn't immediately reverse heating, then carbon isn't responsible for heating. Nature js a mechanism. Computer sims aren't science. Nature isn't a goddess. And human intelligence and machines dominate nature. Period. The loss of the Soviet ideology in this respect is an incalculable loss. The west today and its satellites are just a degenerate anti-materialist set of cults designed to keep workers afraid of thunder and themselves.
" If removing carbon doesn't immediately reverse heating, then carbon isn't responsible for heating."

If CO2 causes heating, then removing it will stop the heating. The problem remains how to do it quantitatively in the billions of tons required.
 
Removing CO2 from the atmosphere will reduce the amount of solar heat that does not get promptly radiated back to space from the sunlit surfaces.

But, the excess solar heat that has already gone into the ocean, especially the deep ocean, and into melting ice caps and glaciers, is another matter. It takes a long time for massive thermal reservoirs to readjust to the new (actually the old) thermal energy distributions.

If that wasn't the case, the Earth would already be much hotter than it is today. Those same reservoirs of thermal heat (or "cold") have kept Earth cooler than the equilibrium temperatures that would eventually result from the current CO2 levels.
 
Dec 20, 2019
16
2
4,515
Visit site
Removing CO2 from the atmosphere will reduce the amount of solar heat that does not get promptly radiated back to space from the sunlit surfaces.

But, the excess solar heat that has already gone into the ocean, especially the deep ocean, and into melting ice caps and glaciers, is another matter. It takes a long time for massive thermal reservoirs to readjust to the new (actually the old) thermal energy distributions.

If that wasn't the case, the Earth would already be much hotter than it is today. Those same reservoirs of thermal heat (or "cold") have kept Earth cooler than the equilibrium temperatures that would eventually result from the current CO2 levels.
The arctic ice cap melting will have no impact on sea levels( not saying it will melt) , and the Antarctic ice has been increasing for decades, except for the area where climate alarmists get data from.

Actual NOAA data shows we are no warmer than average. It is also showing us in a shallow cooling trend. And no this hasn’t been the hottest year on record. Not even close. Extreme weather events are not becoming more common according to ALL data and people killed by extreme weather events has been going down for a century and continue to drop.

No I will not become a socialist serf to prevent “climate change”. In fact as the globalists tighten their grip they will face a massive war that I will be happy to participate in to stop this nonsense.

Anything that is shown to happen needs to be mitigated by reasonable means without culling or impoverishing the human population while adapting to any change. I will not live like my ancestors did under kings and dictators no matter how hot anyone says it will get.
 
Jul 30, 2023
1
0
10
Visit site
Let us cook. I am not troubled at all for the future of the planet - it's more than capable of balancing itself out given it is left to its own devices. Humans on the other hand? Collectively we are a failed iteration of our kind. Let. Us. Cook.
 
Jul 30, 2023
1
0
10
Visit site
But I thought that anthropogenic carbon was the cause of anthropogenic climate change.

Also, won't removing carbon from the atmosphere kill off all the plant life?
 
None of this matters. China pulled out of Paris. 1 coal plant per month is the current rate and along with India this will greatly increase. We are about to see the largest increase in CO2 as never before.

So, whether the scientists.....or anybody else.......doesn't like it.....TS. It's already on it's way.

And idiots are still talking about reducing it. A complete lack of intellect. It's a cartoon.
 
Jul 30, 2023
1
0
10
Visit site
We still need to try. If we can get levels down to preindustrial in 10 yrs, then maybe by 2050 we could have a preindustrial Global Mean Surface Temperature aswell. Doing nothing would seal the fate of all life on Earth.
 
All these new coal plants are just a start. When cheap power and cheap labor is available, corporations/states will manufacture. There will be a huge demand on raw materials. And the supply chains for them. Water is just one. Mining and transportation. Infrastructure alone will be a huge one.

A manufacturing/industrial revolution on a global scale. Industrial cities like we use to have here. The emissions will be much more than just from energy production.

It will take an asteroid, a nuclear exchange or a plague to stop this.