What did 'Climate change experts' do before?

[andy400]

Before the MMGW gravy train rolled into town I mean? Shirley there can't have been as many 'experts', or if there were they must have led a strange existence of studying climate change whilst nobody gave a toss or asked for their findings or opinions.

This morning's report is what mad me wonder.... Climate 'experts' say we must cut our emissions by 90% to balance out our use of aeroplanes.

Climate 'experts' - NO!!!

[hornetrider]

Here's the link for the 90% cut story

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8243922.stm

It's absolutely fecking ridiculous - what do they want us to do? Go back to the dark ages?

[Soovy]

Something about the hole in the ozone layer (remember that one) and before that acid rain (remember that?!)

[Frankeh]

They had lucrative tin foil hat businesses.

[Oakey]

Soovy said:

Something about the hole in the ozone layer (remember that one) and before that acid rain (remember that?!)

spot on! That's exactly what I was going to say!

[Frankeh]

I love that people get so worked up about these things. At no point in history have people put so much effort into a problem they can't even see or feel the effect of.
A+ trolling by scientists.

[esselte]

hornetrider said:

Here's the link for the 90% cut story

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8243922.stm

It's absolutely fecking ridiculous - what do they want us to do? Go back to the dark ages?

When was the last time Anthropogenic CO2 was 10% of what it is today? Genuine question...

[Oakey]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

[FNG]

Oakey said:

ETA: Ironically, the same article that said the hole is stable says that the chemicals used to replace CFC's contribute heavily to global warming. So in a nutshell, the tts who brought us the ozone layer hole have indirectly created MMGW

Yep, but those are the freaks who want us back in the Dark Ages anyway. The fact that anything (gasp) technological has an effect somewhere is just music to their ears and rendered fat to their cartwheel.

Or can't they render fats cos of the methane from cows and all that? I never can keep up with all the things that are scientific and sharp-edged and bad, and the ones that are natural and fluffy and good.

[JagLover]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Given that most of the chemicals causing ozone depletion have now been banned there is little point in further campaigns hence the lack of interest.

It is a shame that MMGW hysteria and the eco-left have discredited genuine environmentalism.

[turbobloke]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

[Bing o]

Oakey said:

Soovy said:

Something about the hole in the ozone layer (remember that one) and before that acid rain (remember that?!)

spot on! That's exactly what I was going to say!

We solved Acid Rain in the 80's - it was very real, and very damaging. The Chinese still have issues with it, but don't let that stand in the way of your ignorance.

[turbobloke]

All levels of ignorance are relative.

[Soovy]

Bing o said:

Oakey said:

Soovy said:

Something about the hole in the ozone layer (remember that one) and before that acid rain (remember that?!)

spot on! That's exactly what I was going to say!

We solved Acid Rain in the 80's - it was very real, and very damaging. The Chinese still have issues with it, but don't let that stand in the way of your ignorance.

Ooooh get her.

[Bing o]

Soovy said:

Bing o said:

Oakey said:

Soovy said:

Something about the hole in the ozone layer (remember that one) and before that acid rain (remember that?!)

spot on! That's exactly what I was going to say!

We solved Acid Rain in the 80's - it was very real, and very damaging. The Chinese still have issues with it, but don't let that stand in the way of your ignorance.

Ooooh get her.

Indeed

[JJCW]

Frankeh said:

I love that people get so worked up about these things. At no point in history have people put so much effort into a problem they can't even see or feel the effect of.
A+ trolling by scientists.

Not even with religion?

People have been very worked up about that for thousands of years!

[RedLCRB0b]

More evidence for the end of the MMGW hoax ?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/09/climate_ch...

Bob

[Darth Paul]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Have to agree with that. People are always surprised that a petrol head such as myself is always trying to reduce waste and recycle whenever possible. I'm all for reducing consumption of energy if possible and recycling whatever can be, I just don't want to be threatened into doing it with the MMGW line.

[turbobloke]

A bit on acid rain and ozone as these are being touted as something they're not. It's not intended to paint the full picture, just to illustrate some aspects that often go unreported. Curiously.

Global production of NOx from forests is equal to that from worldwide industrial and traffic sources combined. See for example Hari et al., Ultraviolet light and leaf emission of NOx Nature 422, 134 (2003). NOx emissions from forests is stimulated by UV, which unlike total solar irradiance, varies by ~100% measured on the increase and over decadal timescales. Another paper, this one from Lewis and Weibezahn, attributes acid rain conditions in their target area (S America) to NOx from seasonal vegetation burning, not 4x4s or factories in other countries. To find research like this it's no use looking for acid rain alone as your search terms. A curiosity indeed.

As for ozone, spot the Montreal Protocol impact in the year...er...actually you can't see it. Anywhere. You can see a Mt Pinatubo eruption, which is where the two plots part company on the one and only occasion, and stratospheric temperature effects though. Curious, possibly.

[Bing o]

turbobloke said:

Global production of NOx from forests is equal to that from worldwide industrial and traffic sources combined. See for example Hari et al., Ultraviolet light and leaf emission of NOx Nature 422, 134 (2003). NOx emissions from forests is stimulated by UV, which unlike total solar irradiance, varies by ~100% measured on the increase and over decadal timescales. Another paper, this one from Lewis and Weibezahn, attributes acid rain conditions in their target area (S America) to NOx from seasonal vegetation burning, not 4x4s or factories in other countries. To find research like this it's no use looking for acid rain alone as your search terms. A curiosity indeed.

Is acid rain not formed when sulfur oxides (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are absorbed by water droplets, (coal power stations, ore extraction plants) forming sulfurous/sulfuric and nitrous/nitric acids. Some of the sulfurous acid can be transformed into sulfuric acid.

Sulfur dioxide and water form sulfurous acid (H2SO3)
SO2(g) + H2O(l) <--> H2SO3(aq)

In some cases sulfur dioxide (SO2) oxidizes to sulfur trioxide (SO3)
2SO2(g) + O2(g) -> 2SO3(g)

The sulfur trioxide (SO3) then combines with water making sulfuric acid (H2SO4)
SO3(g) + H2O(l) -> H2SO4(aq)

Some oxides of nitrogen like nitrogen dioxide (NO2) react with water to form nitrous acid (HNO2) and nitric acid (HNO3)
2NO2(g) + H2O(l) -> HNO2(aq) + HNO3(aq)