Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal
I'm not sure if anyone knows with ~100% certainty how much greenhouse emission it would take to warm the Earth by 1ºF. As you hinted at, the way to answer that is not by measuring output, but rather by measuring the overall non-water vapor greenhouse gas % of our atmosphere. CO2 content is under 0.39% of our atmosphere.
|
so how much does an increase of say, .01% co2 does to the global temperature? I'm just trying to wrap my head around some numbers.
I just read on aedo's link (thanks!) about feedback affects where a slight increase in temperature will increase the water content in the air (which is another green house gas), and decrease the ability of ocean water to absorb C02. It seems like its more of a complex mechanism then I had originally thought.
It seems a lot of people are pretty convinced one way or the other and they will not be convinced no matter what the other side says. (and it seems to fall along political party lines..) I'm leaning towards the thinking that the negatives of doing nothing is far bigger then the short term costs of converting to other options. Even if you don't buy the global warming argument, just the fact that we're paying hostile countries billions for a diminishing resource is enough of a reason to be looking at alternatives to oil.
personally I don't think pure electric is the way to go, but I love the idea of a diesel torque monster with KERS power assist for a sports car, and plug in hybrid bio diesel powered by electricity generated in from my own roof.