Republicans are ecstatic that Biden is struggling with inflation.
Biden Set to Auction Off Over 80 Million Acres to Oil & Gas Drilling Co.
Honestly, I don’t know why I deprive myself of anything in the name of green activity. I will admit, I’m not the biggest green warrior in the world. I’d keep my house temperature hotter in the summer and cooler in the winter. I’d don’t watch much television, and also, try & manage my homes heating/coolness by opening/closing shades with the movement of the sun; nothing too extravagant but it makes me feel better about myself.
All that while we have Richard Branson’s and Jeff “Lex Luthor” Bezos space ride for nothing other than ego stroking. Every other week. . .there’s some new shitcoin popping up that serves absolutely no real purpose — it doesn’t provide any value to the world, only investors. Politicians (Obama’s 15 million beach house) are using the actual examples of climate crisis to prop up fossil fuel industries, pointing to the (fake, manageable, or have equivalent issues in the fossil energy realm) problems in green energy as the cause of the climate crisis. People are brainwashed that even though we KEEP setting “hottest & coldest month” or “hottest & coldest day” records they will fully think climate change
is a thing.
I’m not saying I don’t believe combating climate change is a worthwhile effort, I just don’t see how one person (or a relatively small group) putting themselves out when no one else will. Paraphrasing here but I heard a metaphor story, about a man running from a tiger, he comes to a cliff and leaps off to grab a vine. There’s the tiger above him and tiger below him, and despite the vine about to snap, he focuses on the flower Infront of him and admires the beauty. Both tigers represent life and death, and the vine is the life in-between. Yes it sucks, the future looks bleak. The best to do now is enjoy what you can, because if I spend the next few years in a state of constant fear and dread, I could have had at least a few more years of enjoyment.
What kind of psychotherapy do you think is the most suitable for dealing with collapse-related feelings?
Please, mostly answers based on experience (ie. “I’ve been taking this type
and it has helped me enormously dealing with anxiety, depression, anhedonia, etc…” kind of answers). If you want to share not based on experience, please provide a reliable source (studies) proving that the therapy you suggest is a good option to cope with it. EDIT: I’ve found BetterHelp Tackling complex problems requires a comprehensive approach. Stand Together serves as the backbone of these efforts. Has anyone heard of them? Thanks.
CO2 Makes Up Just 0.04% of Earth’s Atmosphere.
Here’s Why Its Impact Is So Massive.
Reader Question: I heard that carbon dioxide makes up 0.04 percent of the world’s atmosphere. Not 0.4 percent or 4 percent, but 0.04 percent! How can it be so important in global warming if it’s such a small percentage?
Answer: I am often asked how carbon dioxide can have an important effect on global climate when its concentration is so small – just 0.041 percent of Earth’s atmosphere. And human activities are responsible for just 32 percent of that amount.
I study the importance of atmospheric gases for air pollution and climate change. The key to carbon dioxide’s strong influence on climate is its ability
to absorb heat emitted from our planet’s surface, keeping it from escaping
out to space.
The ‘Keeling Curve’ tracks CO2 accumulation in Earth’s atmosphere. (Scripps Institution of Oceanography/CC BY 4.0)
The Saga of Eunice Foote and John Tyndall (rolandjackson.co.uk)
Early Greenhouse Science:
The scientists who first identified carbon dioxide’s importance for climate
in the 1850s were also surprised by its influence. Working separately, John Tyndall in England and Eunice Foote in the United States found that carbon dioxide, water vapor and methane all absorbed heat, while more abundant gases did not. Scientists had already calculated that the Earth was — about
59° Fahrenheit (33° Celsius) warmer than it should be, given the amount of sunlight reaching its surface.
The best explanation for that discrepancy was that the atmosphere retained heat to warm the planet. Tyndall and Foote showed that nitrogen and oxygen, which together account for 99 percent of the atmosphere, had essentially no influence on Earth’s temperature because they did not absorb heat.
Rather, they found that gases present in much smaller concentrations
were entirely responsible for maintaining temperatures that made the
Earth habitable, by trapping heat to create a natural greenhouse effect.
A Blanket in the Atmosphere:
Earth constantly receives energy from the Sun and radiates it back into space. For the planet’s temperature to remain constant, the net heat it receives from the Sun must be balanced by outgoing heat that it gives off. Since the Sun is hot, it gives off energy in the form of shortwave radiation at mainly ultraviolet and visible wavelengths. Earth is much cooler, so it emits heat as infrared radiation, which has longer wavelengths.
Carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases have molecular structures
that enable them to absorb infrared radiation. The bonds between atoms in a molecule can vibrate in particular ways, like the pitch of a piano string. When the energy of a photon corresponds to the frequency of the molecule, it is absorbed and its energy transfers to the molecule.
Carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases have three or more atoms
and frequencies that correspond to infrared radiation emitted by Earth.
Oxygen and nitrogen, with just two atoms in their molecules, do not absorb infrared radiation. Most incoming shortwave radiation from the Sun passes through the atmosphere without being absorbed. But most outgoing infrared radiation is absorbed by heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere. Then they can release, or re-radiate, that heat. Some return to Earth’s surface, keeping it warmer than it would be otherwise.
Solar radiation (yellow) and radiating heat (red) interacting with Earth. (NASA) Research on heat transmission
During the Cold War, the absorption of infrared radiation by many different gases was studied extensively. The work was led by the US Air Force, which was developing heat-seeking missiles and needed to understand how to detect heat passing through air.
This research enabled scientists to understand the climate and atmospheric composition of all planets in the Solar System by observing their infrared signatures. For example, Venus is about 870 F (470 C) because its thick atmosphere is 96.5 percent carbon dioxide.
It also informs weather forecasts and climate models, allowing them to quantify how much infrared radiation is retained in the atmosphere and returned to Earth’s surface. People sometimes ask me why carbon dioxide is important for climate, given that water vapor absorbs more infrared radiation and the two gases absorb at several of the same wavelengths.
The reason is that Earth’s upper atmosphere controls the radiation that escapes to space. The upper atmosphere is much less dense and contains much less water vapor than near the ground, Which means that adding more carbon dioxide significantly influences how much infrared radiation escapes to space. Observing the greenhouse effect. Have you ever noticed that deserts are often colder at night than forests, even if their average temperatures are the same?
Without much water vapor in the atmosphere over deserts, the radiation they give off escapes readily to space. In more humid regions radiation from the surface is trapped by water vapor in the air. Similarly, cloudy nights tend to be warmer than clear nights because more water vapor is present. The influence of carbon dioxide can be seen in past changes in climate. Ice cores from over the past million years have shown that carbon dioxide concentrations were high during warm periods – about 0.028 percent.
During ice ages, when Earth was roughly 7 to 13 F (4-7 C) cooler than in the 20th century, carbon dioxide made up only about 0.018 percent of the atmosphere. Even though water vapor is more important for the natural greenhouse effect, changes in carbon dioxide have driven past temperature changes. In contrast, water vapor levels in the atmosphere respond to temperature.
As Earth becomes warmer, its atmosphere can hold more water vapor, which amplifies the initial warming in a process called the “water vapor feedback.” Variations in carbon dioxide have therefore been the controlling influence on past climate changes.
Small change, big effects
It shouldn’t be surprising that a small amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can have a big effect. We take pills that are a tiny fraction of our body mass and expect them to affect us. Today the level of carbon dioxide is higher than at any time in human history.
Scientists widely agree that Earth’s average surface temperature has already increased by about 2 F (1 C) since the 1880s, and that human-caused increases in carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases are extremely likely to be responsible.
Without action to control emissions, carbon dioxide might reach 0.1 percent
of the atmosphere by 2100, more than triple the level before the Industrial Revolution. This would be a faster change than transitions in Earth’s past
that had huge consequences.
Without action, this little sliver of the atmosphere will cause big problems.
Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff
and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.
Jason West, Professor of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Alan Jones copped an absolute roasting on tonight’s episode of Q&A — despite not even being on the panel. The radio shock jock was slammed by a panel of science experts for downplaying human impact on climate change, after he said we only contribute three per cent to greenhouse gas emissions during his own Q&A appearance last month.
“I saw the radio commentator Alan Jones on TV recently, and he said that 0.04 per cent of the world’s atmosphere is CO2,” the questioner said. “‘Three per cent of that human beings create around the world, and of that, 1.3 per cent is created by Australians’. Is that correct, and if so, is human activity really making a difference?”
Professor David Karoly, an Australian atmospheric scientist based at CSIRO, bluntly responded: “Not everything Jones says is factually accurate.” Prof Karoly said that, while it’s correct that 0.04 per cent of the world’s atmosphere is carbon dioxide, Jones’ statistics around humans causing climate change — and the role Australians specifically play — is completely false.
“I am a climate scientist, and Alan Jones is wrong. The reason he’s wrong is because we know that yes, the greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere is 400 parts per million … and that corresponds to about 0.04 per cent. “All his other numbers were wrong. We know that carbon dioxide concentration 100 years ago was about 280 parts per million, or 0.028 per cent, but it’s grown 120 parts per million — or about 40 per cent — and that 40 per cent increase is due to human activity. We know that for absolute certainty.
In other words, Prof Karoly was saying we’ve technically increased greenhouse gases by 40 per cent, not the three per cent figure Jones used. The scientist also slammed the radio host for implying that Australians contribute a negligible amount to global warming.
“Australians have contributed about 1.5 per cent. Now that sounds like a small amount, but Australia only makes up 0.3 per cent of the population, and we’re contributing 1.5 percent of greenhouse gases,” said Prof Karoly. “So is it fair that 0.3 per cent of the global population has contributed 1.5 per cent? We’ve contributed much more than our fair share.”
Astrobiologist and Geologist Martin Van Kranendonk questioned why Jones was commenting on climate science in the first place. “If your car wasn’t doing well, would you take it to a butcher? No, you’d take it to a mechanic. For the source of data on scientific matters I personally wouldn’t go to Alan Jones.
I’d look for the best-known sources for that material, and people I trust. I think that would be true for everyone.”
“There’s this perception that scientists are out there doing nefarious little tricks in a dark alley and concocting these models for fame and fortune and glory and money, and that’s not at all how science works,” he went on. “All the people that I know in science are passionate about understanding the natural world.” During his Q&A appearance in May, Jones questioned why climate change was a key issue in Australia.
“What is climate change? … Young people are highly intelligent.
They have many platforms from which they can (glean) their information and knowledge. I wonder whether they’re being told all the facts in relation to this.”
Particle physicist Brian Cox said people think the climate is overly “simple”, which is a big part of the problem. “But actually, the climate is extremely complicated. These models are very, very complicated and constantly evolving. “I think many people assume you can just work out what the climate’s going to do, like it’s common sense.
But it’s actually a very complex system.”
So if you take .04 per cent, the CO2 proportion of all gases in the atmosphere, divide that by 3 per cent, the proportion of CO2 that human beings are responsible for, you get the figure of .001 per cent of all gases in the atmosphere produced by human beings.
This is wrong. The percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is roughly 0.0397%. The percentage at the beginning of the industrial revolution was 0.0280%.
Humans are thus responsible for an increase of 0.0117% out of all the gases in the atmosphere. The level of CO2 in the atmosphere was less than 0.0300% for about 20 million years. Also, if you really want to be nitpicky and since we’re using the completely useless measurement of “all gases in the atmosphere”,
The level of Oxygen would have decreased because it is used in the production of CO2. Furthermore, it is misleading, because the total percentage of the most abundant greenhouse gas, Carbon dioxide, that humans are responsible for, has increased by about 40%. Alan Jones quoted in his “apology” a figure of 3%, when in fact 40% is the case, and that figure of 40% is increasing virtually every year.
These wrong and misleading facts were repeated again, later on:
I explained how the figure that was used in the broadcast came to pass, just
as I’ve explained to you now, .04 percent of all the gases in the atmosphere is carbon dioxide, 3 per cent of that .04 percent is created by human beings, so the proportion of CO2 that human beings are responsible for of all gases in the atmosphere is .001 per cent.
Again, human beings have been responsible for a rise from about 0.028% to 0.04% in atmospheric concentration, and more is yet to come as we continue to emit carbon dioxide. The level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been increasing over the past decade at about 2 ppm/yr.
This implies, over the next 30 years, an increase of 20% above the pre-industrial revolution era for a total of nearly 60%. It is true that 3%, near enough, is the total percentage of carbon dioxide that humans emit out of the total percentage of carbon dioxide emissions at any given point in time.
It is also the case that about 57% of this is absorbed by natural sinks.
What our emissions have done is to upset a global balance that had been in place for 20 million years, and it is a folly to suggest that nature will be able to correct this problem by itself in any of our lifetimes, while the concentration of carbon dioxide increases nor with no consequences on the biosphere.
Out of nations with more than two million residents:
Australia is the 3rd largest producer of carbon dioxide per capita,
after Kuwait and the UAE, ahead of both the United States and Saudi Arabia.
It falls on Australia to be responsible, and factually incorrect and misleading statements by Alan Jones, broadcast and disseminated by his audience, and given the political influence he leads, severely harm the ability for Australia to be responsible for the Earth’s future.
And all these things are facts.
In summary, Alan Jones’ “apology” was factually incorrect and misleading
on the most important matter and thus insufficient action must be taken by
the responsible authorities that demanded this “apology” in the 1st instance.
.04 per cent, the CO2 proportion of all gases in the atmosphere, divide that
by 3 per cent. Assuming that by ‘.04 percent’ Jones means 0.04 rather than 0.0004: 0.04 divided by 0.03 equals 1.3333…… As a side note, many people offhand say ‘divide by half’ when they actually mean ‘divide by two’. Dividing by half is the same as multiplying by two, and dividing by two is the same as multiplying by half.
Wait, am I missing something?
Your claimed time period is 20,000,000 (20 million) years,
but the graph you referenced only shows 400,000 of those years?
The Atmosphere: Getting a Handle on Carbon Dioxide –
Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (nasa.gov)
Your mind will collapse if you try to imagine this | UNIVERSE SIZE COMPARISON
Yellen says economic slowdown in China would have “global consequences”
Have a look at CO2 over a geological time period: – Like This
There are plenty of other graphs that show this trend.
Part One: ‘The Atmosphere: Earth’s Security Blanket‘
Part Two: The Atmosphere: Getting a Handle on Carbon Dioxide
Climate in the United States | USA Facts
Seasonal Changes in Carbon Dioxide
NASA | A Year in the Life of Earth’s CO2
If the planets replaced our moon (Realistic)
Why does Climate vary around the world?