Home | About | Donate

Earth's Carbon Concentrations Have Soared to Levels Not Seen for 800,000 Years


#122

“We can already date the year wine is bottled by the amount of caesium - 137 in the wine.”

And this is evidence of what exactly? Typically the discussion in terms of wine has to do with nuclear weapons testing not nuclear reactor emissions.

“We do not want climate change but we do not want exposure to this shit either.”
Ok this is valid, but if you feel this way then don’t make erroneous comments about how you care so much about waste products lasting for thousands of years. Cesium 137s half life is 30 years, not 1,000.


#123

Yes right there.


#124

Way to much nuclear isotopes in our environment already. Thank you very much. Get your profits else where.


#125

Fair enough, but at 10 decays youre reaching 870 years. Additionally I would like you to validate your information that Japan experienced 23 tons of Plutonium 238. Sometimes Pu-238 can be used in MOX fuel, which many Japanese reactors use. However 23 tons would seem to make Pu-238 the greatest concentration, which doesn’t make a lot of sense due to Plutonium 241 and Plutonium 242’s greater neutron flux.


#126

Makes it one of the bad ones as you point out. But none of them are good. Only some worst than others. Yet all of the products and by products of this industry are not good for you and should be used very little. If fact limit them to the lab.


#127

Because you have already concluded that “people are the problem” facts don’t matter. Look, I’m aware that your line of thinking goes back to Malthus whose 18th century “Treatise on Population” was disproved in his own time by non-other than David Ricardo. The reason why this argument (Population Bombers a la Paul Ehrlich) keeps coming back is that it serves an ideological purpose: to divert responsibility for the crisis (poverty in Malthus’ time to AGW now) from capital accumulation to those least responsible - poor people. The problem is carbon in the biosphere not people. The greatest single institutional contributor to carbon - polluter - in the atmosphere in the world is the US military. Population density does equal density of pollution from fossil fuels, look at Bangladesh whose carbon use per capita is 1/50th that of the average American. We could replace the American people with their fossil fuel use with Bangladeshi’s the world could support (50 times 300 million) or 15 trillion people in the world and not use any more fossil fuels than today. It’s how much pollution there is not how many people that matters.


#128

“Way to much nuclear isotopes in our environment already. Thank you very much. Get your profits else where.”

  1. There is no such thing as nuclear isotopes. They are called radioactive isotopes, because their radioactive describes the unstable nature of the isotope. Nuclear describes energy stored within the nucleus of an atom. There are hundreds of isotopes that can undergo fission an release the binding energy from a nucleus aka nuclear energy, but there are only a few fissile isotopes that describe the characteristic of emitting more than two neutrons when undergoing fission. Understanding these definitions is significant to at least demonstrate you have some idea of what youre talking about.

  2. If there are too many radioactive isotopes on earth, why isn’t all life including humans dying to radiation sickness?


#129

“But none of them are good. Only some worst than others. Yet all of the products and by products of this industry are not good for you and should be used very little.”

This is a rather interesting comment considering the fact your body is literally made of radioactive isotopes. In fact as the result of living on a radioactive planet nearly everything you experience on a daily basis contains isotopes that are radioactive. Not to mention the fact that you receive background radiation from the sun and space all the time as well.

As for there is nothing good for you, I guess that means we should throw away the majority of our cancer treatments, and just to be safe because radiation is always dangerous lets destroy all of our CT, PET, and X-ray machines as well. In fact lets eliminate the entire field of medicine related to nuclear science, radiotherapy, radio-spectrometry, and other areas of nuclear medicine.

Oh and make sure your house is never equipped with any fire alarms, because clearly those things are just going to kill you, with all the Americium inside of them.


#130

We are screwed…coming and going…Have u heard of global dinning???..it works like this…the particulate pollution from coal burning …cars…etc… Is what is slowing? Down the warming at this point .IF we were to stop… Emitring these paarticulates like. Tomorrow… We would immediately warm like .1Degree c…I think that is what it is…I could be off on that … But any who…it is the PACE of this warming …that would be the killer…cause…it would occur in about …1month??.something like that …if u have not heard of this …then check it out … Me…I am for stopping it …just because it is the right thing to do… However… overall. .we are screwed…either way…


#131

See I love it when you choose to make ridiculously ignorant comments like this, because it just shows everyone you have no clue what youre talking about.

“Yet all of the products and by products of this industry are not good for you”
There is literally an entire scientific theory which completely destroys this idea- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis


#132

I think the number of people is a serious problem for some global ecological systems, particularly when it comes to the effects of supplying food for very large populations, but when it comes to greenhouse gases then the number of people doesn’t matter much if there are no emissions or very low emissions. Basically we need to get emissions per capita greatly reduced and this is certainly technologically possible. The biggest source of emissions in the US is now transportation. Reducing emissions from generating electricity is much easier than reducing emissions from transportation. This is a major challenge.


#133

The Department of Defense (DOD) has the largest carbon footprint of any enterprise on the planet. The DOD is the single greatest manufacturer and disseminator of tools and toxins like Agent Orange and nuclear waste that are inherently destructive to ecosystems. Nearly 70 percent of U.S. environmental disasters classified Superfund sites by the EPA have been caused by the Pentagon, which is a primary polluter of U.S. waterways. There should be no surprise, then, that at least 126 military bases have contaminated water, causing cancer and birth defects in service-members and their families. (So much for supporting the troops.)


#134

Time is not on our side w the planet.


#135

Oh so you had kids, but it’s my fault.

Nice try at tossing shade.


#136

Have you heard that Blockbuster video has closed? Yeah, like oh my gawd, I know.

Look at Dhaka Bangladesh videos. They are using stone tools and learning how to use fire. So sad.

Not.

They are now buying all the same stuff as everyone else. There are two Wal Marts in Dhaka.

And when you bring up 18th Century philosophy it’s so cute. I bet you’re a big hit at cocktail parties. But, this is 2018. Exponentials happen.

I see cars, roads, office buildings, shopping malls, houses, and all the other stuff of consumer society. What do you see?


#137

A consensus of scientists in a report (Interglacials of the Last 800,000 Years, by Past Interglacials Working Group of AGU Publications, March 5, 2016) are now predicting that the huge rise in atmospheric CO2 that is occurring so FAST geologically will likely vastly extend our Holocene interglacial life cycle well beyond an expected 5,000 years to 50,000 years - before the next strong drop in the northern hemisphere insolation (amount of solar radiation received by earth’s surface) will occur! The threshold for a cold glacial depends not only on insolation but also on atmospheric CO2 content. This stunning news makes it ever more critical to stabilize and reduce a growing sky-high atmospheric CO2 concentration of 405ppm today to no more than 350ppm by 2050.

We can consider ourselves “lucky” today (a strange choice of words. I’ll admit) that the sun’s radiation is much dimmer than in the prior Eemian interglacial - when sea levels rose 6-9 meters higher than sea levels now!. And sun during our Holocene interglacial will remain dimmer for a very long time, according to scientists. BUT, even a modest Holocene solar insolation process, combined with continuing current very high CO2 concentrations and a peak seasonal earth warming by a perihelion - i.e., **a time when the earth is closest to the sun in the summer,**as IS occurring now in the Arctic, rather than in the winter - is a planet heating-up recipe for an unfathomable climate disaster in this century.

Extensive analysis of air bubbles trapped in ancient ice sheets show that CO2 atmospheric concentrations had remained within a 170-280ppm range for past 800,000 years. During this time, a number of ±100,000 year glacial cycles occurred with ±20,000 year warming interglacials in between. Often, coincidences of solar maximums and variations in earth’s orbit first triggered temperature changes later amplified by CO2, CH3, N2O emissions. Scientists believe rising temperatures at the end of glacials probably created positive feedbacksof outgassings of ocean-stored CO2 built up over thousands of years.

So too today, one might think - given the extraordinary FAST warming up of oceans from extremely high CO2 emissions absorbed by the oceans - that substantial ocean CO2 outgassings might well occur this century and certainly onward. Compared to the thousands of years glacial and interglacials developed over the past 800,000 years, we have phenominally progressed from a CO2 concentration of 280ppm in 1750 to 405ppm today and rising - all in a TINY 268 years. And 75% of that increase occurred even FASTER in a TINY, TINY 58 years from 310ppm in 1960 to 405ppm in 2018.

This is the world of man-made climate change showing its face with record, prolonged, extreme temperatures; massive, repetitive floods and fires; loss of many lives and enormous, costly physical destruction. This is just the beginning. The CHANCES and TIME left to mitigate, delay, adapt to, even avoid some of the worst effects of global warming are getting less and less.

The Trump Administration is scientifically blind to the fact - and doesn’t seem to give a damn - that human-induced greenhouse gas warming of the earth by 4-5 degrees Celsius presents a planet-kiling threat to all living species. The Republican Administration is also blind to the reality that oil and natural gas reserves are finite. In essence, they will be depleted, technically and cost-wise unexplorable by 2075 … a time when our 7.5 billion population today wiil have risen by 2.5 billion to 10 billion by 2075 - a TINY 57 years from now!

I want to remain hopeful against all odds that president Trump (or his succesor) and his climate-change science denier gang WAKE UP to the priority for a RAPID societal transition to use of green energy sources (sun, wind, hydro, nuclear, etc.) and green living styles in a multiple of small,big, creative ways related to, for example: vehicle size and energy efficiency, frequency of use: greatly extended bicycle use and paths; mass transit systems; green agriculture methods, food supply, eating non-meat foods; heating and air-conditioning systems; 100% green energy use in the airplane industry; well-designed tree-planting and strengthening programs (especially in cities), etc…

The risks of not taking aggressive actions top-down and bottom-up are HUGE. Nations like the Scandinavian countries, Germany, Scotland, the Netherlands (finally), Spain and others as well as states like California pand ±16 other U.S. states fully recognize the urgency for everyone - individuals, communities, governments, corporations, research institutions - to support plans and policies that help stabilize and reduce global atmospheric greenhouse gas emissions to at least 350ppm by 2050.

A pipe dream given our polarized society and broken political system from top to bottom? Perhaps. But I find it extremely hard to give up on our nation’s ability to come together and get its act right on super critical fundamental issues seriously affecting everyone … and in the case of climate, change, an issue affecting our livability on this planet.
,


#138

Any rapid societal transition that does not prevent 10 billion people from living here is simply rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. No matter which resource you use, if enough people use it, it will run out. So people have to begin to question this cult of natalism.

But yes, people don’t realize that the planet can change drastically because of CO2. What we’re seeing now is miniscule to the potential change. Storms could become as large as continents, and heat could rise beyond the capability of most life, except for microbes.

But just keep having those kids and hope that people change how they consume stuff. I’m sure it will all be fine.


#139

Hormesis only the terminal ignorant believe this and now that you have brought it up it puts you in the stupid category and this conversation is over. Stupid.


#140

So you honestly think that radiotherapy and cancer treatments are killing patients faster than if we did nothing? That’s astounding…


#141

but but but… it says in the Leftist Socialist Manual that all radiation is bad.

And chem trails too!

And don’t get vaccines it’s not natural.

The sad thing about politics, left right whatever, is that scientific illiteracy ruins everything. People won’t read the research. They would rather feel righteous. Natural good. Science bad.

This video pretty much sums up the political discourse, left right whatever…