Latest CO2 increase marks largest rise ever in world's atmosphere

I think there is a video of Konstantin Kisin about this subject that you guys can take a look. I found his speech interesting and funny, although the main point of the debate in the video was about Woke culture.

Personally I don't believe in electric cars, but I do believe that destroying rain forests, polluting rivers and oceans, exterminating animals for leisure will change the whole ecosystem dramatically, and human is just a part of the ecosystem. Nature has been nurturing us for a long time, but nature can also destroy us, that I do believe.

MarcusNumb said:

I think there is a video of Konstantin Kisin about this subject that you guys can take a look. I found his speech interesting and funny, although the main point of the debate in the video was about Woke culture.

Personally I don't believe in electric cars, but I do believe that destroying rain forests, polluting rivers and oceans, exterminating animals for leisure will change the whole ecosystem dramatically, and human is just a part of the ecosystem. Nature has been nurturing us for a long time, but nature can also destroy us, that I do believe.

Click to expand...

It's most likely CO2 is an intentional distraction away from actual pollution...

What does this goofy, political ideology driven "article" have to do with tech news? Another fail for techspot!

hover389 said:

In a article talking about CO2 increase why is there a picture of power plant evaporation towers emitting water vapor? Its almost like the author doesnt understand where CO2 comes from.

Click to expand...

And the 2 chimneys on the left are?

How’s this tech related?

Kirby1 said:

Nothing in this article does any of that. I agree that in the past the narrative was often about blaming individuals rather than the corporations that run the factories and all that, but in more recent times I think people have gotten smarter about it and the narrative usually puts the blame in the right place.

Click to expand...

Shifting the blame to corporations is convenient but fallacious. Ask yourself: why do these corporations run these factories (and power stations)? Because we, the individual people, consume their goods and the energy they produce. It will always come back to the needs of individual people...and many of them.

Unless real alternatives to fossil fuels are developed, the "problem" will continue. Conventional nuclear is one powerful (pun intended) solution. The coal plants of the world output orders of magnitude more radioactivity into the atmosphere than all of the existing nuclear power plants have ever produced over their entire lifecycle - combined.

If we argue that addressing climate change is a policy issue, and thus one that should be driven by government, then eliminating the *****ic roadblocks that are in place that prevent new nuclear plants from being built is a political path to progress. Most of those roadblocks come in the form of advocacy groups filing endless litigations to keep them from being built, and delaying progress if they even make it to the first stage of building.

Small modular reactors are a promising path around all of that nonsense.

BbN48 said:

Cutting way the f down on animal product consumption would help a lot too. Factory farming and associated wastes account for something like 20% of greenhouse gas emissions.

People could just not eat so much meat, and the looming catastrophes would be much smaller.

Click to expand...

This is largely debunked, you realize that, right? India alone has far more cattle than all of North America. And for the most part, they don't eat meat, or beef in particular. Guess what happens to all those cows? They live and generate methane and co2, and die and generate methane and co2. Whether we eat their meat or not. Before North America was "invaded" by westerners, far more Bison roamed the plains than the cattle that roam them now; and Bison are larger than plain old cows.

Animals for the most part, are just a normal part of the carbon cycle, independent of meat consumption.

"The latest Keeling Curve data taken at NOAA's Mauna Loa Observatory [...]"

I've always wondered why they situated the global standard for measuring CO2...on an active volcano...which can release a steady stream of CO2 even when dormant.

SRB said:

If it's really that bad, and we're all facing extinction, why aren't we issuing ultimatums to China and India? I have to stop driving, shut down my local natural gas generating plant and pay double for my electricity, while these counties build multiples of coal fired plants and put far more CO2 into the atmosphere. All while eradicating our industries and manufacturing. We're chumps for going along with this farce.

Either that, or since we want to prosecute oil companies for CO2, and it is that bad, we should declare war on China to prevent our own demise. Or is it only OUR CO2 that causes the problems.

Click to expand...

China issues two permits for new coal-fired power plants...every week.

243GW of coal-fired power plants are currently being constructed.

anastrophe said:

Shifting the blame to corporations is convenient but fallacious. Ask yourself: why do these corporations run these factories (and power stations)? Because we, the individual people, consume their goods and the energy they produce. It will always come back to the needs of individual people...and many of them.

Unless real alternatives to fossil fuels are developed, the "problem" will continue. Conventional nuclear is one powerful (pun intended) solution. The coal plants of the world output orders of magnitude more radioactivity into the atmosphere than all of the existing nuclear power plants have ever produced over their entire lifecycle - combined.

If we argue that addressing climate change is a policy issue, and thus one that should be driven by government, then eliminating the *****ic roadblocks that are in place that prevent new nuclear plants from being built is a political path to progress. Most of those roadblocks come in the form of advocacy groups filing endless litigations to keep them from being built, and delaying progress if they even make it to the first stage of building.

Small modular reactors are a promising path around all of that nonsense.

Click to expand...

You can debate how much of corporate industrial activity is in the interest of the greater good, but that doesn't mean corporations don't take shortcuts whenever possible. Trading a manufacturing process that cost slightly less but pollutes twice as much would be the kind of behavior we would hope to curtail with environmental laws. Infact, the US has been on a long streak of year on year reductions on CO2 emissions for a long time, with the exception of one or two years during the Trump presidency when it actually went up slightly.

Kirby1 said:

You can debate how much of corporate industrial activity is in the interest of the greater good, but that doesn't mean corporations don't take shortcuts whenever possible. Trading a manufacturing process that cost slightly less but pollutes twice as much would be the kind of behavior we would hope to curtail with environmental laws. Infact, the US has been on a long streak of year on year reductions on CO2 emissions for a long time, with the exception of one or two years during the Trump presidency when it actually went up slightly.

Click to expand...

The downward trend began in 2005. It blipped upward in 2018, then took its most significant drop during the interval in 2020; it's back on an upward trend since then. I don't think who was president was responsible for any of it.

It's silly to even worry about the US trend. China is the problem.


(Not sure if graphic will work. Images from https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions)

Kirby1 said:

Wikipedia: Greenpeace has criticized Moore, calling him "a paid spokesman for the nuclear industry, the logging industry, and genetic engineering industry"[4] who "exploits long-gone ties with Greenpeace to sell himself as a speaker and pro-corporate spokesperson"

Click to expand...

Can those sorts of arguments not be applied both ways? I'm sure a there's people on both sides that have "interests". There's plenty of money at stake on both sides...

When a twit like me reads an article on this very site in the last few days telling us that renewable sources are now used for a third of the world electricity needs, articles like this start making me cynical about clean energy.

Corporations Did It! Chins Is To Blame! Greenpeace Lies!

When I was born, mid 20th century, we knew nothing about global warming, or at least the average guy on the street didn't. We just went along happily making more people. Lessee... We were at about 2.5 billion back then.

Today, EVERYONE knows about global warming, but no one really knows why, not really. Me, I think it MIGHT have something to do with six billion (more than 300%!!!) more humans on the planet, and climbing....10 billion by 2050 at present rates... And they all need food, housing, transportation..

To quote one of the world's greatest philosophers, Pogo, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

The science is over.If there was any doubt big oil/coal would have funded real research top prove it . Gas companies knew in the late 1960's and 1970's climate change was coming, You thing coca cola does know fanta and coke are absolute junk for you as well?
Throwing out BS talking points, is just for the gullible to cause doubt
Remember when big polluters used to back crazy scientists, Oh just you wait, none of these scientists mounted to anything They have not predict anything in the future that has stood up.

Ask yourself if you doubt uncontested science that CO2 is a greenhouse gas known for 160 Years .
If you doubt the world has been warming since the start of the Industrials revolution
If you believe every scientist studying climate change , every government who backs the science ( which I think is nearly every country) is doing it as some kind of scam and conspiracy

Well what do you believe? I don't want some unknown natural cycle no one knows about. Things like galactic dust drifting through our solar system , magnetic fields and the ilk are also now considered

Why is the world warming then?
When will this warming stop ?
Why are the current models so accurate ? yes they are

Everyone knows the play book of the polluters and the gullible

first deny the world was warming ( they did this for decades ), I bet most of those here today spouting doubt , were saying this a decade ago ( I have yet to see one of these gullible people to be honest and say "I was wrong to doubt the world was warming" ( doesn't instil respect for such dishonest people )
Say the increased CO2 is wonderful for all life and the planet - we see these lies here again and again
Say it's an unknown cycle - See this lots of times here
Say is CO2 like above from mostly natural sources. When climate change being man made has long passed the gold std

Say we can do nothing to stop it
Say we are smart we will find easy tech fixes ( this sounds silly , when lots of useful Idi0ts saying how can puny man affect the climate. yet they can see a cities micro climate )

When large polluters are taken to court, none of their arguments are the BS they put out to the gullible and stupid. It's more plausible how did we really know back then , we are only providing stuff mandated by the economy etc. or we did nothing illegal, IT's weird they 100% know it's real, they even say it's real, yet they can fool flat earthers really easy.

Anyway if you don't believe CO2 is a greenhouse gas , why do you believe this
.
What science to you currently believe that will predict the future warming or cooling , As yet all the crazy scientist in the last decade who predict an end to the cycle have been 100% wrong /

Finally no one is changing opinions here, which is funny as research say those would say it's all a lie, if they are in business like a farmer, actually make decisions based on the fact climate change is real

Most deniers are inherently dishonest, they do not argue in good faith, Selective evidence , selective cherry picking facts. inconsistent statements.

Look above none of their writings are seeking the truth , they are just BS statements taken from big pollters

I mean something like , yes CO2 by man is not good but the sun heating the ocean like it has done for millions of years is the main cause

Or though warming is definitely going to cause some problems, it also will do lots of good

You never see such statements from the gullible , it's just CO2 is not man made . CO2 is actually wonderful we are all now better of with the more dramatic floods, droughts , artic warming. earlier spring we are now seeing , food will be bountiful , hot desert areas will team with life

With the ocean , it had slowed up heating in the atmosphere, nature of water vs air to hold heat, But that boon is mostly over

no one is changing opinions here, in 30 years if a boomer here is still alive , they will not say I got it wrong, I was gullible, just like they nver admitted they goy it wrong about the world warming

You know you said it was BS the world was warming ?

Seriously, no one correlates recent spike with Russian invasion? Estimate the enormous amount of CO2 emitted from Russian ballistic and cruise missiles, jets, tanks, navy, explosions, cities burnt to the ground, oil reservoirs and refineries on fire, etc. Effects of war are order of magnitude larger than switching from 30 MPG car to 40 MPG car. Do you think such a massive war CO2 footprint does not affect US? You are wrong.

Nelson28 said:

This is terrifying! The new record high for CO2 is awful news. It's clear our fossil fuel dependence is pushing the planet past tipping points. We need serious action now to cut emissions before it's too late. 2-3 ppm annual increases are still scary, even if it's not the record jump. We have to act on climate change!

Click to expand...

Cut emissions by stopping Putin burning Ukraine. Just estimate the CO2 impact of the war.

rhavenn said:

That's not how that works.

1) Yes, the planet was hotter at times in the past, but CO2 levels and heat took 10s or hundreds of thousands of years to go up and down. We're doing a speedrun and doing it in less than ~100 years. The planet's ecosystems can't adapt that fast. Humans won't be able to survive in the equitorial zones and you'll have mass migrations that make your current "immigration" issues look paltry.

2) the sun does go through cycles, but that's not what's "warming the oceans" or causing the release of CO2. Oceans do release CO2 when warmed, but the sun didn't just start "baking" the earth at a time scale that humans can measure or comprehend. Most of the CO2 coming out of the oceans is due to decaying plant matter releasing sequestered CO2 back into the environment and the increase in decaying plant matter is due to the rise of ocean temperatures, pollution and loss of habitat. Even IF it were true...the numbers being talked about are not "massive" in a global scale. Some articles talk about it's the same as 1-2 million cars driving for a year. Now, that's a lot of cars, but considering all the other **** we burn (forests, fuel, making plastics, energy, etc...) it's a small number. You do realize that burning rain forests, burning coal, burning oil, burning natural gas, burning pretty much anything is releasing CO2, right? That CO2 acts as a blanket in the atmosphere.

3) Nature might prosper if it wasn't for the pollution, cutting it all down and again..nature can't "adapt" as fast as the changes we're making. On a geological timescale...we're working in nanoseconds. Yes, theoretically, some climate zones would grow and shift further north / south towards the poles, but you will also see changes in weather patterns and some places will be desert that weren't before. Overall, weather will just get more extreme.

Click to expand...

True, but please do math first and do not omit CO2 footprint of the Russian war in Ukraine.

Clearly we need to buy more luxury battery cars and provoke more and larger military conflicts and enforce stricter authoritarian regulations on human activity (exempting the elites of course).

And always remember… ‘Be wary of climate activists arriving on private jets.’

antiproduct said:

There's always gotta be at least one person who eats up the fossil fuel industry garbage and then regurgitates it across the internet...

Click to expand...

We book a few plane tickets a year, the farther the better, buy a home, then drive daily, use the ac/heat so we feel comfortable. We buy more packaging than product, but we wish someone saved the planet. We are a bunch of hypocrites, the "fossil fuel grabage" is us.

IMO, if climate change agenda keeps pushing on and people get riled up that more and more needs to be done, I hope we are ready to give up a lot of luxuries we enjoy now. A viable reason for Governments to form Authoritarian Climate Change agenda that will limit your freedom.

kiwigraeme said:

The science is over.

Click to expand...

Funny. Every major scientific organization says "more research is needed" -- and they're desperately begging for billions of dollars in grant money for more such climate research. Seems they feel there are still questions to be answered.

kiwigraeme said:

If there was any doubt big oil/coal would have funded real research top prove it .

Click to expand...

You can't prove a negative, you realize that right? No one is funding research to prove poltergeists and tree fairies don't exist, you notice?

kiwigraeme said:

Gas companies knew in the late 1960's and 1970's climate change was coming

Click to expand...

Where does this silliness come from? In 1975, the big scare was global COOLING from industrial pollution -- in 1975, Newsweek Magazine had this as its cover story, and predicted that within 30 years, temperatures would be so cold crops would fail, and millions would starve.

kiwigraeme said:

Why are the current models so accurate ? yes they are

Click to expand...

No, they're not. Dr. James Hansen's -- the so-called father of Global Warming -- models from the early 1990s predicted a climate sensitivity of up to 10.5C per CO2 doubling. That figure has repeatedly been scaled down, now reaching the current figure of 1.5C as per the latest IPCC report in 2022.

Oh, and since 1.0C of that has already happened, the current estimate is another 1/2 degree by the year 2052.

When all climate change activists stop flying around in private airplanes, then I may believe lol.