An even bigger greenhouse gas

Heckler · #11 (**permalink**) 12-03-2007, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crowonapost

Yes Methane hydrate can release massive amounts. It is hard to pull from the bottom of the ocean one because most are deep in the ocean & two it is volatile as it converts from frozen hydrate directly to a gas & is hard to contain.

One of the current ongoing theories for some of the mysterious missing ships in the Bermuda triangle is massive releases of methane hydrate. Because it becomes immediate gas as it rises & in large bubbling gases ships in it's path simply fall through the bubbles & sink.

Fun.

Imagine my surprise when this wasn't the flatulence thread.....

I saw something recently where they believe there may have been release events in the past that did affect climate....but that was just speculation...

I don't believe there is a magic bullet for future energy needs/concerns...rather, I think any solution will come through multiple avenues....

Tokenconservative · #12 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oedipus Rex

The biggest 'greenhouse gas' is H2O.

Yeah!?

Well, fellow Greenies! You KNOW what that means!

The protest march against this new threat to our Mother, the Earth, starts at my house Tuesday after next!

I have Hummer and limo parking in the rear.

Tokie

Tokenconservative · #13 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Upton

He's checking out his Nobel Prize. An award most Republicans aren't eligible for, as you have to show at least a modicum of intelligence.

LOL!

Yeah...Algore's Nobel was awarded him based on his intelligence, and not politics.

Sheesh.

Tokie

Tokenconservative · #14 (**permalink**) 12-09-2007, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crowonapost

The biggest greenhouse gas is H20, true. It's not an issue of the biggest it's the issue of the gas that tips the temperature over time. Methane is a more concentrated green house gas but dissipates rather quickly. CO2 does not. That's why it's long term effect is more pronounced at tipping the temperature.

I'm sure you all knew that though.

I din't know dat!

Here is what I DO know: human activity accounts for, at most, 4-6% of the TOTAL CO2 in the atmosphere (Earth's... we are unsure as to what part human activity plays in the warming currently going on on most of the other planets in the Sol system, but a "consensus" of "scientists" is pretty sure Hummers are largely to blame there, too!).

Which reasonable minds can agree is a pretty small amount. Even more reasonable minds can agree that this is probably playing an infinitessimal role in the current (peaking in 1998, apparently) warming of the global climate.

Shrieking, anti-Western Global Warmingists (remind you of anyone?) will irrationally conclude that climate has never changed before, and that this piddling percentage of CO2 must then therefore be the sole cause of climate change and that since the US has a larger economy than anyone else (while producing far less pollution of this sort on a per-capita basis when adjusting for economic product, than even Canada, an amount about equal to that of Europe, and is a lame-assed piker compared to places like Russia, China, India) why, it must be the US that is "DESTROYING OUR MOTHER, THE EARTH!!!" and that's why the US should ratify Kyoto, because Kyoto is clearly intended to cripple the US economy (for purely environmental-concern reasons from the competing nations and socialists who hatched this nutty plan), so that we can save our Mother, the Earth!

I know that.

You do, too. But you have liberal blinders lag-bolted to the side of your head.

Tokie