IPCC Climate Change Report: Human Activities Linked to Global Warming
International News • February 2, 2007
After a full week of presentations and discussions in Paris, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) adopted the Summary for Policymakers of the first volume of "Climate Change 2007", ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: RE: Skeptics?
Posted On: February 5, 2007, 9:18 am CST
Posted By: Algoresucks
Comment:
The long term carbon cycle is a system with built-in feedback mechanisms. One that has long been proposed is quite simple.
Suppose the plate tectonic cycle sped up so that more CO2 was being released into the atmosphere? If weathering rates and photosynthesis remained constant, CO2 would "pile up" in the atmosphere. But CO2 is a green house gas - the more CO2 there is the more heat gets trapped in the atmosphere and the warmer it gets.
Chemical reactions, however, run faster as it gets warmer.
So, as it gets warmer, the chemical reactions of weathering increase and more CO2 gets consumed, so lower atmospheric CO2 levels result. It is a negative feedback.
Suppose, now, that the plate tectonic system slows down so very little CO2 is added to the atmosphere; what happens?
As it gets colder because of the reduced CO2 in the atmosphere, the chemical weathering reactions slow down.
CO2 now "piles up" because its consumption has dropped.
The same kind of relationship holds for photosynthesis.
If photosynthesis increased wildly for some reason, O2 would go up because more organic carbon would be buried.
But if O2 goes up things burn easily (forests are close to self-imolation all the time now). The increase in forest fires would decrease photosynthesis.
In addition to supplying O2 though carbon burial, plants also act to "fertilize" weathering. Carbonic acid comes not only from water reacting with atmospheric CO2 but even more important is the carbonic acid produced from CO2 in the soil. CO2 is much more concentrated in the soil because of the respiration of plant-produced organic matter by microbes, fungi, the soil fauna, and plant roots themselves.
Thus the more land plant photosynthesis there is, the faster the weathering - all again subject to negative feedback. If too much CO2 is removed it gets too cold for plants to live, plant-mediated weather decreases and the CO2 can build up again.
Doesn't this suggest that whatever affects the long-term distribution of plants will also effect atmospheric CO2? - it sure does, as we will see in subsequent lectures.
OBVIOUSLY LIFE IS CRITICAL TO THE MAINTENANCE OF OUR ATMOSPHERE
Now we can seen what I mean by life being an active chemical system separated from its surroundings and out of chemical equilibrium with its surroundings.
If there were no photosynthesis, all of the O2 would combine with reactive minerals and organic matter. CO2 would build up in the atmophere in exact proportion to the lack of carbon burial. We would end up with a super-greenhouse effect and end up more like Venus.
The only time organisms are in chemical equilibrium with their surroundings is when they are dead: thus, Chemical equilibrium = death.
Our own Greenhouse problem from the burning of fossil fuels has a quite interesting relationship to the long term carbon cycle.
Presently nearly all of the organic carbon produced by photosynthetic organisms gets respired by animals, fungi, and microbes. Only the tiniest bit gets buried. But this is enough not only to maintain the O2 levels at a more or less steady state, but over geological time it is directly responsible for the formation of fossil fuels.
EVERY BIT OF OIL, GAS, AND COAL IN THE WORLD IS THE RESULT OF TINY AMOUNTS OF ORGANIC CARBON BEING BURIED BY ESCAPING BIOLOGICAL RESPIRATION.
You couldn't possibly understand all this and so I will put it simply just because people say it is true doesnt make it true especailly when the experts are being paid to say it is a problem. Liberials!!!!!!
Subject: RE: Skeptics?
Suppose the plate tectonic cycle sped up so that more CO2 was being released into the atmosphere? If weathering rates and photosynthesis remained constant, CO2 would "pile up" in the atmosphere. But CO2 is a green house gas - the more CO2 there is the more heat gets trapped in the atmosphere and the warmer it gets.
Chemical reactions, however, run faster as it gets warmer.
So, as it gets warmer, the chemical reactions of weathering increase and more CO2 gets consumed, so lower atmospheric CO2 levels result. It is a negative feedback.
Suppose, now, that the plate tectonic system slows down so very little CO2 is added to the atmosphere; what happens?
As it gets colder because of the reduced CO2 in the atmosphere, the chemical weathering reactions slow down.
CO2 now "piles up" because its consumption has dropped.
The same kind of relationship holds for photosynthesis.
If photosynthesis increased wildly for some reason, O2 would go up because more organic carbon would be buried.
But if O2 goes up things burn easily (forests are close to self-imolation all the time now). The increase in forest fires would decrease photosynthesis.
In addition to supplying O2 though carbon burial, plants also act to "fertilize" weathering. Carbonic acid comes not only from water reacting with atmospheric CO2 but even more important is the carbonic acid produced from CO2 in the soil. CO2 is much more concentrated in the soil because of the respiration of plant-produced organic matter by microbes, fungi, the soil fauna, and plant roots themselves.
Thus the more land plant photosynthesis there is, the faster the weathering - all again subject to negative feedback. If too much CO2 is removed it gets too cold for plants to live, plant-mediated weather decreases and the CO2 can build up again.
Doesn't this suggest that whatever affects the long-term distribution of plants will also effect atmospheric CO2? - it sure does, as we will see in subsequent lectures.
OBVIOUSLY LIFE IS CRITICAL TO THE MAINTENANCE OF OUR ATMOSPHERE
Now we can seen what I mean by life being an active chemical system separated from its surroundings and out of chemical equilibrium with its surroundings.
If there were no photosynthesis, all of the O2 would combine with reactive minerals and organic matter. CO2 would build up in the atmophere in exact proportion to the lack of carbon burial. We would end up with a super-greenhouse effect and end up more like Venus.
The only time organisms are in chemical equilibrium with their surroundings is when they are dead: thus, Chemical equilibrium = death.
Our own Greenhouse problem from the burning of fossil fuels has a quite interesting relationship to the long term carbon cycle.
Presently nearly all of the organic carbon produced by photosynthetic organisms gets respired by animals, fungi, and microbes. Only the tiniest bit gets buried. But this is enough not only to maintain the O2 levels at a more or less steady state, but over geological time it is directly responsible for the formation of fossil fuels.
EVERY BIT OF OIL, GAS, AND COAL IN THE WORLD IS THE RESULT OF TINY AMOUNTS OF ORGANIC CARBON BEING BURIED BY ESCAPING BIOLOGICAL RESPIRATION.
You couldn't possibly understand all this and so I will put it simply just because people say it is true doesnt make it true especailly when the experts are being paid to say it is a problem. Liberials!!!!!!