Global Warming & Climate Change Discussion

[mtcn77]

Wouldn't it be better to say we have to stop emitting greenhouse gases, so in case it's true we avoid the worst ?

The worst isn't temperate climate, it is Mars & Moon. We need to find a way to rehabilitate soil mycelium, without it we are sand people.

 

[Sir cheese]

The worst isn't temperate climate, it is Mars & Moon. We need to find a way to rehabilitate soil mycelium, without it we are sand people.

How could it disapear ? Beside, i don't get the moon& mars part...

 

[mtcn77]

How could it disapear ? Beside, i don't get the moon& mars part...

Foilage gives them shade. No shade, no fungus, no hummus, no water, no soil. The least we can do is incorporate the dead tree beards into the soil when the rainy season starts. Fungi don't like to come out of their underground cottages and as is the custom, we should go visiting holding treats of soil turned upside down - unless you have a better idea to let loose livestock to trample them into an open buffet of their favourite pulp.

 

[Sir cheese]

Foilage gives them shade. No shade, no fungus, no hummus, no water, no soil. The least we can do is incorporate the dead tree beards into the soil when the rainy season starts. Fungi don't like to come out of their underground cottages and as is the custom, we should go visiting holding treats of soil turned upside down - unless you have a better idea to let loose livestock to trample them into an open buffet of their favourite pulp.

Okay, but it means, when there's a forest, there's fungus, and everything is fine. And i think the time when there's no more forest is the death of our kind.

 

[mtcn77]

Okay, but it means, when there's a forest, there's fungus, and everything is fine. And i think the time when there's no more forest is the death of our kind.

The death of *soil*, not us in particular. We are cultivators. We aim to cultivate the Mars, even. It is natural for us - we need food for our metabolic rate to continue. For that, too much of weird water solutes is the surest way to kill our appetite. Just like the fungus enjoys a strict diet of treebeards served on a buried dishplate, we like our fresh produce without any contaminants. It is interesting how much fungi play a part in detoxifying inarable land and taking the toxins with them as deep as it can be away from their favourite food source - our earthly clippings.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Finally something everyone can agree on:

Plant a trillion trees: U.S. Republicans offer fossil fuel-friendly climate fix

Republican lawmakers on Wednesday proposed legislation setting a goal for the United States to plant a trillion trees by 2050 to fight global warming, a plan intended to address climate change by sucking carbon out of the air instead of by cutting emissions.

www.reuters.com

 

[dont whant to set it"']

Why didn't the "Democrats" think of it , oh wait , them did , yet only now ... .

 

[R-T-B]

Why didn't the "Democrats" think of it , oh wait , them did , yet only now ... .

It's not exactly a novel or original idea, and seeing it tied into the "sustainable forestry" bandwagon grants it a rather interesting color (pulp mills are a huge co2 factor), but yeah, ok.

 

[the54thvoid]

You don't fix a leaking bucket by pouring in more water. You fix the hole. Planting trees is a good idea on paper and in scientific studies, however, it is a measure that qualifies others to rest on their laurels and not try to fix the ongoing issues. Also, business will seize upon carbon offsets and continue the commercialisation of finite resources.

 

[mtcn77]

You don't fix a leaking bucket by pouring in more water. You fix the hole.

Well plants do prevent water erosion. So, it depends on the kind of plughole you want to fix.
We won't succeed by spreading our modern landscape. Deserts are the most carbon emission releasing ecologies, like cities. It all relates to the soil condition.

 

[the54thvoid]

Desert Basins May Hold Missing Carbon Sinks

Understanding these sinks and how they function is critical for calculating the world’s carbon budget

www.scientificamerican.com

In mobile, sorry for lazy link. Desert basins also act as Carbon Sinks, removing CO2. But they can release it back to the atmosphere. An area for further study, not well understood.

 

[mtcn77]

I kind of think pollution is the wrong mindset. It is carbon extraction. No one dies of carbon. Everyone dies of oxygen, it is very acidic. Its titration is basic. If you were to be deprived of carbondioxide suddenly, your perfusion would stop.
I still think this is no different than mining for carbon ores and then releasing it into the atmosphere, since it is the form in which trees sequester carbon.
There is also the issue we still have not wrapped our heads around it. I think of it as the mastery of carbon economy still looming out of our grasp.

 

[R-T-B]

No one dies of carbon.

No one dies from global warming either. The weather it creates might kill you though...

 

[rruff]

No one dies from global warming either. The weather it creates might kill you though...

Overall it's likely to be beneficial for life... even human life.

 

[R-T-B]

Overall it's likely to be beneficial for life... even human life.

Well, the ice age that always follows a warmimg trend is the part that really sucks. Happens when the polar glaciers melt enough... and guess whats happening?

 

[mtcn77]

No one dies from global warming either.

The canbon cycle doesn't necessarily increase warming. It is desertification and our ineptitude to harness it properly. If we would have more substrate we should have a higher reaction constant, eh? Pretty simple logic.
Just lay a mulch substrate for water-fastness, keep and preserve the soil humidity in tight regulation and let carbon be diverted to the subsoil. We have the computing power to monitor every acre of the Earth by FLIR cams to stay below 20°C year round. That is all there is to hand it over to mycelium to take over command.

 

[Schmuckley]

Where is grass in the global warming alarmists chart of plants that convert CO2, hmm?

Nowhere, because grass absorbs 400% more CO2 than the highest plant they list.

The internet has been gimped and not on where I have a saved link, but this:

"The most efficient plant photosynthesis is the C4 pathway. Mostly this is warm season perennial grasses, but there are several other plants that developed this through convergent evolution. C4 plants represent about 5% of Earth's plant biomass, yet they account for about 23% of terrestrial oxygen production through photosynthesis. "

Which plant is most efficient at converting CO2 to oxygen?

Answer (1 of 15): No plant can convert carbon dioxide to oxygen. In photosynthesis (simplifying just a little), water is converted (oxidized) to molecular oxygen and carbon dioxide is converted (reduced) to carbohydrate. This may of course look like conversion of CO2 to O2. You probably would l...

www.quora.com

 

[mtcn77]

This whole co2 release from the canopy is only possible if there isn't an understory to keep soil in cool condition. I know it isn't the simplest ordeal to cover the Earth by some layer of mulch, but unless it is met, the criticality of carbon balanced will be unsettled.
We should also look for canopy mulch that is basic, not acidic like the pine-redwood-cypress-eucalyptous coniferous soil dessication poles. We are doing this to the benefit of saprophytes to usher them into doing the work we cannot.

Where is grass in the global warming alarmists chart of plants that convert CO2, hmm?

Nowhere, because grass absorbs 400% more CO2 than the highest plant they list.

The internet has been gimped and not on where I have a saved link, but this:

"The most efficient plant photosynthesis is the C4 pathway. Mostly this is warm season perennial grasses, but there are several other plants that developed this through convergent evolution. C4 plants represent about 5% of Earth's plant biomass, yet they account for about 23% of terrestrial oxygen production through photosynthesis. "

Which plant is most efficient at converting CO2 to oxygen?

Answer (1 of 15): No plant can convert carbon dioxide to oxygen. In photosynthesis (simplifying just a little), water is converted (oxidized) to molecular oxygen and carbon dioxide is converted (reduced) to carbohydrate. This may of course look like conversion of CO2 to O2. You probably would l...

www.quora.com

If you are going to use C4, you are talking about high grasslands that don't work as efficiently as C3 in high latitudes.
There is also the issue, those grasses need to be razed for the saprophytes to incorporate it into the subsoil before the rain season. If rains fall and grasses begin aerobic decomposition overground, there is carbon unsettlement into the atmosphere, that is mitigated when anaerobically performed by the necessary saprophytes.

 

[R-T-B]

The canbon cycle doesn't necessarily increase warming.

You must've missed this entire thread and are just jumping on with a new theory.

Believe me, carbon (along with a host of other gasses) certainly contribute to global warming. We've analyzed this to death, as professional quasiscientists.

In other news, the real scientists beat us to the same conclusion.

 

[Schmuckley]

You must've missed this entire thread and are just jumping on with a new theory.

Believe me, carbon (along with a host of other gasses) certainly contribute to global warming. We've analyzed this to death, as professional quasiscientists.

In other news, the real scientists beat us to the same conclusion.

What does man have to do with that?

 

[R-T-B]

What does man have to do with that?

...we artficially dump a lot of those gasses into the atmosphere?

And before you post charts citing the natural carbon cycle, keep in mind natural carbon cycle carbon tends to get reused by the earth. Ours doesn't. It's an excess and the earth doesn't know how to deal with it, as most of the time ancient deposits of well-past-mummified plant matter (aka oil) don't end up going into a gaseous form on a large, industrial scale.

 

[Schmuckley]

...we artficially dump a lot of those gasses into the atmosphere?

And before you post charts citing the natural carbon cycle, keep in mind natural carbon cycle carbon tends to get reused by the earth. Ours doesn't. It's an excess and the earth doesn't know how to deal with it, as most of the time ancient deposits of well-past-mummified plant matter (aka oil) don't end up going into a gaseous form on a large, industrial scale.

Proof as to how that contributes to the planet raising in temp?

 

[mtcn77]

You must've missed this entire thread and are just jumping on with a new theory.

Believe me, carbon (along with a host of other gasses) certainly contribute to global warming. We've analyzed this to death, as professional quasiscientists.

In other news, the real scientists beat us to the same conclusion.

Again, carbon is less acidic than oxygen. So, if anything, its molecule with oxygen is less acidic than oxygen by itself(I'm using empiric intuition at this step).
When dissolved, the only reason we aren't aware of o2 damage is because it isn't very dissociable in water. Otherwise we would be talking about water cutting with dissolved oxygen. In fact, o2 is super toxic to plants, it would help if we could keep them in hyperbaric co2 conditions.

 

[R-T-B]

Proof as to how that contributes to the planet raising in temp?

It's really documented throughout this thread. Google "greenhouse effect" and learn to science on youe own, son.

Again, carbon is less acidic than oxygen.

Yes, but magma still burns despite being mostly carbon.

There is more to this than acidity. My god.

 

[Schmuckley]

It's really documented throughout this thread. Google "greenhouse effect" and learn to science on youe own, son.

"Google" and "science" are unrelated, son. I've been researching and doing research papers since before Google, boy.
I remember when Altavista was more reliable than Google, k?
And it truly was.

In those days it was "Ice age is coming" sky is falling stuff.

All you have to do is give money to your overlords and they'll take care of it, amirite?

Google is simply a search engine, and these days it's biased and not as good as in say...2006.