2021 Jun 6, 8:39am
431 views 36 comments
we have no hope of reigning in emissions or the acidification of the oceans.
We are not significantly increasing CO2 in the atmosphere, or the ocean, by burning fossil fuels
So no peeing in the ocean, and were good, right?I'm at the beach right now... getting ready to pee in the ocean..
What is NOT known is how much effect this will have on climate. Personally I think the warming effect is minimal. The oceans give me the most concern, as dissolved CO2 makes them more acidic leading to less conducive atmosphere for life. Since phytoplankton are the primary way carbon dioxide is removed from the oceans, any change that leads to less hospitable environmental for those organisms may lead to a death spiral. We should absolutely move away from fossil fuels and towards nuclear for the world’s energy needs.
I hope that guy is right. If he is, the CO2 released by human activity is a net benefit for the planet.
The oceans give me the most concern, as dissolved CO2 makes them more acidic leading to less conducive atmosphere for life.
"Acidification of the oceans" is a myth. In 1990, it was supposed to destroy all ocean life, by 2010.
My understanding, from listening the the older generation of scientists (the ones who came up with climate change predictions in the first place and weren't alarmist about it) is that there is not enough sources of carbon on the planet to ever turn the ocean acid, i.e., < pH=7.
Some scientists predicted if we hadn't come along in about 150K years there wouldn't be enough CO2 to support plant life and they'd all be dead. As it was 100 years ago plants were sort of gasping for 'air' so to speak.Yes, it's not all bad...
car battery tech is worse than fossil fuels
Maybe humans output more CO2 per mile than some kinds of motors.
If you do a lot of exercise, you burn more, get hotter, give off more CO2.
If you do a lot of exercise, you burn more, get hotter, give off more CO2.How efficient is human metabolism compare to an internal combustion engine?
Seems he developed a way to transmit energy wirelessly to any point on the globe with almost no loss of energy.
Been reading Tesla's autobiography. Seems he developed a way to transmit energy wirelessly to any point on the globe with almost no loss of energy.
I know you are joking, but if that were true people would lose noticeable weight by breathing heavy.
80% of weight loss is breathed out CO2.
just_passing_through says80% of weight loss is breathed out CO2.My wife (who has two masters and is a dietician) agrees with this statement.
Agreed, using a generator is inefficient, so let's use plugin power. It takes about a kilowatt hour to charge a e-bike for 20 miles. The US Department of energy says producing 1 kilowatt of electricity creates about .92 kg of CO2. So in that case, human and ebike CO2 emissions are about the same.
I've read that reptiles are more energy-efficient than mammals,
It's kind of weird to think about... I'd imagine triglyceride math is different than sugar math though.
Gills big enough to support even a dolphin sized animal would be the size of a parachute and would quickly deplete the surrounding water of oxygen. Warm blooded animals must be air breathers with lungs that take advantage of the 20% atmospheric oxygen.
Some sharks are warm blooded. It's 25 years ago but when I was a pre-med we were told that the definition of warm blooded simply meant that oxygenated blood didn't mix with de-oxygenated blood in the heart. Blood with a higher oxygen content allows for a hotter burn in cells, warming the animal.