Cyclists above the law
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: Conor on 6 Dec 2009 08:23 In article <867b9ab4-a44a-433c-9d1c-c983963201b2 @g25g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>, MasonS(a)BP.com says... > The carbon coming out of your car is *new* carbon that was previously > locked away for millions of years. So it isn't new carbon then, is it? Its old carbon being released. > The carbon coming out in my breath *could* be the same carbon that > Julius Caesar ate. > Big difference. Otherwise this wouldn't happen. > Rubbish. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: Conor on 6 Dec 2009 08:24 In article <m4anh5lrb93jl7219jpm1e4jajd386jt3f(a)4ax.com>, Tom Crispin says... > > On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 04:39:21 -0800 (PST), "MasonS(a)BP.com" > <MasonS(a)BP.com> wrote: > > >http://www.holon.se/folke/carbon/pictures/maunaloa_CO2graph.jpg > > Figures in Friday's Economist are worse than that graph. > > It gives the figure of 280 parts per million before the Industrial > Revolution (I take that to mean before 1780) and claims it reached 430 > parts per million last year. But it wasn't that long ago that the scientists were saying particles in the air contributed to global cooling as they prevented the suns rays from penetrating to ground so surely more carbon particles in the air should lead to cooling, not heating? -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: Conor on 6 Dec 2009 08:26 In article <1g2nh553v5j7pg067ct22kp5c230frb2ks(a)4ax.com>, Peter Grange says... > > "The only good cyclist is a dead cyclist" passes for a "comment" in > your world does it? It does in most of the country save that inhabited by weaselly men with no bollocks. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: Mr. Benn on 6 Dec 2009 08:51 "MasonS(a)BP.com" <MasonS(a)BP.com> wrote in news:727342a9-d05e-4b49-b1ee- fc03b286b9cc(a)h10g2000vbm.googlegroups.com: > On 6 Dec, 12:46, "Mr. Benn" <%...@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> "Mas...(a)BP.com" <Mas...(a)BP.com> wrote in news:867b9ab4-a44a-433c-9d1c- >> c98396320...(a)g25g2000vbl.googlegroups.com: >> >> > On 5 Dec, 23:09, JNugent <J...(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote: >> >> Mas...(a)BP.com wrote: >> >> > Not all CO2 is the same. >> >> >> You are one of Doug's sock puppets AICMFP. >> >> > The carbon coming out of your car is *new* carbon that was previously >> > locked away for millions of years. >> > The carbon coming out in my breath *could* be the same carbon that >> > Julius Caesar ate. >> > Big difference. Otherwise this wouldn't happen. >> >> >http://www.holon.se/folke/carbon/pictures/maunaloa_CO2graph.jpg >> > -- >> > Simon Mason >> >> So who's tagging the molecules? > > That's an old graph. The current levels are off the scale of that > graph and now stand at 384 ppm as shown here. > > http://co2now.org/ > > Where do you think all of this extra carbon is coming from? BP!
From: Tom Crispin on 6 Dec 2009 08:51
On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 13:24:50 -0000, Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >In article <m4anh5lrb93jl7219jpm1e4jajd386jt3f(a)4ax.com>, Tom Crispin >says... >> >> On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 04:39:21 -0800 (PST), "MasonS(a)BP.com" >> <MasonS(a)BP.com> wrote: >> >> >http://www.holon.se/folke/carbon/pictures/maunaloa_CO2graph.jpg >> >> Figures in Friday's Economist are worse than that graph. >> >> It gives the figure of 280 parts per million before the Industrial >> Revolution (I take that to mean before 1780) and claims it reached 430 >> parts per million last year. > >But it wasn't that long ago that the scientists were saying particles in >the air contributed to global cooling as they prevented the suns rays >from penetrating to ground so surely more carbon particles in the air >should lead to cooling, not heating? The Economist report deals with that issue in an article "Unpacking the problem". ==========quote========== Black carbon [soot] is a particular problem in the Arctic and the Himalayan glaciers; it melts snow and ice and thus increases the tendancy to absorb heat from the sun. It contributes somewhere between an eighth and a quarter of global warming. Unlike CO2, which stays in the atmosphere for centuries, it disappears within weeks. Cutting emissions would therefore make an instant difference. ==========/quote========== The article (not the report as a whole) is quite upbeat. It speaks of the 1987 Montreal Protocol which agreed to halve CFC emissions in 12 years, but it got rid of them all in ten years. By breaking down Greenhouse Emissions into smaller packages, the article argues, Copenhagen would have a real chance to make a real difference. |