Controlling global warming

[altyfc]

Scientists take giant step to stop global warming: vaccines to reduce farm animals' burps and farts...

Aaron

[MarkuisMellvile]

I've not read your article Aaron, but the idea is comical!

The methane given off by animal species has been part of our climate since they evolved. While the climatic forcing caused by the methane in the atmosphere is 40 times as great (per molecule) as from carbon dioxide, and the proportion of methane is increasing year on year, the rate of change is nowhere near as great as the massive amounts of combustion emmissions being added by humankind.

Disrupting an animal's digestive process is hardly healthy, and will not counteract the impact of industrial development in the likes of China and India.

Distractions from the effort to build a sustainable human existence, weaken attempts to stimulate action from the masses, and provide another excuse for big business to drag its feet while claiming that insufficient proof exists of climate change being caused by their activities.

I'm sure the article makes funny reading, but the many articles published on sustainability are of greater value

[include]

While the climatic forcing caused by the methane in the atmosphere is 40 times as great (per mole) as from carbon dioxide

Are you saying that moles are the biggest cause of global warming?

[MarkuisMellvile]

Originally Posted by include

Are you saying that moles are the biggest cause of global warming?

If they are, then This could provide the answer to climate change

[reality]

Humans contribute perhaps 10% of all CO2 output. Is it really going to do much good for us to undertake hugely expensive schemes to reduce that by a few percent?

[ooen]

Originally Posted by reality

Humans contribute perhaps 10% of all CO2 output. Is it really going to do much good for us to undertake hugely expensive schemes to reduce that by a few percent?

I think a few percentage is rather substantial. Also even if it is actually a small change, as we accumulate small changes, we make a big change. I keep hearing some people saying, "Yeah, good idea, but it makes such a small change." Sometimes even the smallest change matters. Sometimes small changes make a big change. Sometimes a small change itself does not do much in terms of pure math in science, but it is an important change in politics.

[reality]

Originally Posted by ooen

I think a few percentage is rather substantial. Also even if it is actually a small change, as we accumulate small changes, we make a big change. I keep hearing some people saying, "Yeah, good idea, but it makes such a small change." Sometimes even the smallest change matters. Sometimes small changes make a big change. Sometimes a small change itself does not do much in terms of pure math in science, but it is an important change in politics.

Small change is fine and I agree that many small changes can make a big difference. The problem however is that certain measures to produce small changes (Kyoto for instance) are hugely expensive. I don't believe these procedures represent value for money.

[ooen]

Speaking of money, 600 bn is spent on defense, which is actually nothing but production of weapons worldwide. 350 bn is spent to subsidize agriculture in developed countries. I wouldn't call Kyoto expensive looking at these numbers. Now, just to avoid any confusion, I am not saying that we can abandon weapons today and we can all be happy. I am also not saying that we can suddenly change the way in which governments do things, BUT personally, I'm so tired to people saying, oh, it's expensive, oh, it's difficult, oh, it's unrealistic, yada, yada, yada. In particular, I'm so tired of people saying it's expensive. Again, I don't believe that we can solve environmental problems in a year or two, but we need to stop saying that it's expensive. It's one of the first things we need to do ...

[reality]

Originally Posted by ooen

Speaking of money, 600 bn is spent on defense, which is actually nothing but production of weapons worldwide. 350 bn is spent to subsidize agriculture in developed countries. I wouldn't call Kyoto expensive looking at these numbers. Now, just to avoid any confusion, I am not saying that we can abandon weapons today and we can all be happy. I am also not saying that we can suddenly change the way in which governments do things, BUT personally, I'm so tired to people saying, oh, it's expensive, oh, it's difficult, oh, it's unrealistic, yada, yada, yada. In particular, I'm so tired of people saying it's expensive. Again, I don't believe that we can solve environmental problems in a year or two, but we need to stop saying that it's expensive. It's one of the first things we need to do ...

Again, I agree with you about the defense budget. A vast waste of money if ever there was one. A fine example of governments angling for power rather than providing something of positive use to society.

You're also right about agricultural subsidies. Any subsidy is governments attempt at controlling a market place and it does no good to buyers or producers.