Apart from carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), water vapour (H2O), tropospheric ozone (O3), chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are the other gases which are responsible for green house effect.
Dear Dominic,
according to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change the global warming potential of different GHGs is assessed taking CO2 as reference: https://unfccc.int/process/transparency-and-reporting/greenhouse-gas-data/greenhouse-gas-data-unfccc/global-warming-potentials
Best,
Sascha
Carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrogenoxide (N2O), Ozone (O3), hydroflorocarbon (HFC), perflorocarbon (PFC), and sulfurhexacloride (SF6) are GHGs
In a hotter global environment the issues include sea level rising more damage for tropical diseases and more erratic weather events. When soil organic matter is increased it counteracts the over enrichment in carbon dioxide and nitrogen but more importantly it mitigates the effects of global warming on our planetary food system. Water from soil is the biggest limitation to our rainfed global food system. Enriching soils with organic matter counteracts greenhouse gas enrichment in the atmosphere while simultaneously working to help our crops adapt to getter erratic supply water. The ability of soil organic matter to improve to crop nutrition transfers to food being enriched in vital nutrients. The world soil organic matter reserves has shrunk with the agriculture and industrial ages. The use of tried and true technology and modern science can foster the filling of soil organic matter gap which will work to foster our future health and increase our ability to work through our pretty unprecedented increase in global greenhouse gases. From the act of photosynthesis to the generation of stabilized soil organic matter the carbon atom and water molecule will follow each other in global biogeochemical recycling system.
Apart from carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), water vapour (H2O), tropospheric ozone (O3), chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are the other gases which are responsible for green house effect.
There is substantial information which shows from the geological record that 6 of the last 7 major extinctions have been associated with peak greenhouse gas events. IPCC put the elevation of greenhouse gases as a man generated event currently. I think if man has produced his modern activities and indeed what man has done he can undo.
The big difference in this event compared to previous ones is that man has evolved consciousness to understand the role of his activity in the change of the atmosphere and the consequences this can have.
There was time when we were largely unaware of the effect of our activities related to atmosphere. The databases on Mauna Loa has put that contention to rest but people still can argue on the nature of effects.
You have argued that population is prime determinant which is also controlled by man's choices.
I have really enjoyed the 'explanations' by Kenneth M Towe
and Paul Reed HepperlyIn this era of high population growth, is there anything we can do to reduce these greenhouse gas emissions without affecting energy and food production globally?
There many avenues for both reducing the emission foot print and increasing carbon sequestration. Electric vehicles have a fraction of the foot print that gas combustion has. Use of natural gas instead of coal would reduce greenhouse gas footprint by one half. The list goes on and on. In addition the ability to tap into a new generation of nuclear reactors for electricity can complement the burgeoning ability to use renewable fuels to replace gasoline. Brazil runs its vehicles on ethanol from the cultivation of sugarcane. In the Amazon terra preta show pre Colombian Indians modified the soils to change them from less than 10,000 Kg C per ha to over 300,000 kg per ha by using recycling and carbon char. The Amazonian Indian modified sites superior to the land area of modern France. The magnitude of the ability to convert extensive areas in a permanent way shows an enormous untapped potential for sequestration to be a game changer for the enrichment of the atmospheric greenhouse gases. Because the enrichment of soils which counteract the atmospheric gas situation also mitigates the greatest challenge to our food system which is inefficient use of scarce water resources. Since the greenhouse gas footprint can be greatly reduced the idea that greenhouse gases are unmanageable is something of neo Malthusian misnomer.
Ken The utilization of a renewable carbon source is not equivalent as suggested as using non renewable geological carbon sources.
Very simply put the impact of burning a renewable fuel is completely distinct for burning fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels are nonrenewable resources many scientist suggest their utility has only a double hundred years at current increasing consumption trends.
Biomass is renewable it can be grown year after year.
When it comes to biomass the energy use gives an emission with in a short time is reabsorped into plants and some into soil.
My all estimates the generation of petroleum coat and natural gas takes millions of years. For this reason they are classified as nonrenewable no ability to regenerate them year by year.
The massive fossil fuel use goes into air but the vegetation and other mechanism cannot return it like biomass.
The coal and petroleum reserve is also much more contaminating than biomass renewable fuel.
In Brazil ethanol is generated from sugarcane and fuels much of the transpotation sugarcane does not need to planted every year and is very efficiency in recapturing carbon dioxide gas.
The ability to use biomass both for renewable fuel and for char to improve degraded acid tropical soils is a way to get a cleaner energy system and having the ability to take carbon from the air and lock it into the soil for plant productivity and environmental benefit.
I am attaching a follow the money expose on how the information from the fossil fuel industry is trying to change the science of climate change.
When you get the wild denials look to follow the money it will lead to reason information is given that just does not line up.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Petroleum Engineering
- Gas