Well, I guess it's us

[jafs]

Somebody, help me out.

Wasn't it MG and PS who got into a long passionate debate about "Overshoot"?

[Cortopassi]

I talked with an atmospheric sciences professor at U of I a few weeks ago during a visit with my daughter.  His first question to the group was, what do you think is the major contributor to global warming in the atmosphere?

The answer is plain old H2O, water vapor (from wikipedia below):

----------

On Earth, naturally occurring amounts of greenhouse gases have a mean warming effect of about 33 °C (59 °F).[69][d] Without the Earth's atmosphere, the Earth's average temperature would be well below the freezing temperature of water.[70] The major greenhouse gases are water vapor, which causes about 36–70% of the greenhouse effect; carbon dioxide (CO2), which causes 9–26%; methane (CH4), which causes 4–9%; and ozone (O3), which causes 3–7%.[71][72][73]

-----------

So I asked him, why do we only hear about CO2 emissions from governments and not water vapor?  Because we think we have some limited ability to control our emission of that gas.

I've gone from a Greenpeace and wildlife advocate in my 20s to a this is all hypocritical lying BS position in my 40s.

So we have a gas called water vapor which can possibly make up 70% of the warming effect.  And how does dropping CO2 help?  I don't know.  All I do know is regardless of all this bullcrap, we continue to naturally move humanity toward efficiency.  Think LED bulbs, electric cars, wind power, solar power, higher efficiency appliances, windows, etc. 

I don't think we need to have any of this stuff shoved down our throats.  It will just happen as a matter of course.

And, really, what would happen if we did modify the atmosphere enough and end up cycling it in the direction of too much cooling?  Or a couple major volcanoes block the sun for a few years a bit?  We'll all be scrambling to throw as much CO2 in the atmosphere as we possibly can to prevent crop failure and worldwide starvation!

[Pointedstick]

Somebody, help me out.

Wasn't it MG and PS who got into a long passionate debate about "Overshoot"?

MT. MediumTex, not MachineGhost.


I agree that globally, India, China, and the rest of the developing world are a far bigger problem than the already relatively eco-conscious developed world (especially Europe). But there's often something you can personally do that helps the planet and yourself. For example, my investments can pay my gas and electric bills for life at the cost of about $20,000. If I can spend less than that in the process of converting my house to be net zero and only use site-generated solar power, it's a financial win. The number to beat is probably even higher because electricity prices are about to jump and natural gas prices are at historic lows. So I'm doing it. Once I'm done, I will have reduced my carbon footprint and also the amount of money I need to achieve financial independence, and hopefully increased the value of my property as well by at least a fraction of the purchase price of these improvements.

Will my one set of choices make a difference for the planet long-term? Probably not. But collectives are just groups of individuals. If more of the people who were concerned about this actually did something implementable and effective (i.e. moreso than re-usable grocery bags ) in their own lives about it, maybe it would make a difference.

[jafs]

Thanks.

And, I completely agree that individual decisions can make a difference, if enough people make good ones.  So, congratulations on your plans!

We just recently signed up for Westar to offset all of our energy usage with wind power, for a very small extra charge each month (works out to about $1/month on average for us).  There's also an organization called "TerraPass", which invests in reductions of greenhouse gases (mostly methane) - you can donate to them in an amount likely to offset your emissions.  They're monitored by another group to make sure they're doing what they claim.

Skeptical science has good answers to the question about water vapor, of course.

I think that part of the reason people have a strong desire to deny the problem is that it's a big problem, and there aren't a lot of easy answers.  And, of course, the real answers would require that we all work together, which isn't easy to accomplish, given the tendency we have to fight with each other.  But, there are some hopeful signs, like the Kyoto thing and the recent Paris one.

Maybe we'll manage to pull it together in time.

[barrett]

Just don't try to control others and force them to conform to your personal concept of right or wrong - but, it is up to them to buy what you are selling, it is not for you to decide they must buy it.

... Mountaineer

It is so freeing, comforting and peaceful to know some will be redeemed; no worries about all the mess we have made.  I can't wait for that perfect new earth. 

... M

Do you even realize you do this? Constantly? And how hypocritical it is? 

Pug, The good news is that hell has been cooling rapidly and it's not such a bad place anymore! Apparently all of us sinners have caused some big time AHC (anthropogenic hell cooling).

[MachineGhost]

Indeed it's not.  But a correlation that seems to have stood up for 400,000 years might be something you want to pay attention to.

That reminds me of President "Slick Willie" Clinton arguing about what the meaning of the word "is" is.

Seriously, I'm with Tyler on this one.  When the doom porn proponents come up with a realistic plan to deal with the so-called AGW problem, I will give them the benefit of the doubt.  As it stands currently, the narrowly focused science and the proposed solutions make me a cynical skeptic.