Subscribe via RSSWhat is Carbon Pollution
According to this article:
"AT FIRST it was thought the carbon tax would apply to 1000 of
Australia's biggest polluters, then it was 500, and now the climate
change department says it's "more like 400"
Can they please keep recounting, at this rate they will be down to zero...
Also it appears in the US that something we seem to be willing to pay many dollars for a tonne is so cheap that the exchange set up to trade it has been forced to close . Basically the Chicago Climate Exchange can't really function that well as an exchange when the good you are meant to be exchanging is worthless, see below
Can't go much lower than $0.05 per ton... Maybe there is an opportunity here to buy up all these $0.05 per ton units of Carbon and sell them in Australia where they will fetch $23 per tonne... So much for a working global market - this is what happens when you base a market on a worthless commodity that everything pretty much is made out of!
Follow us on Facebook, click here!
Comments left
- Tassia said:
How can a site that deseminates blatant lies (there is concrete data showing temperatures have already increased 0.5-1 degree globally) be promoting itself as Eco friendly and sustainable. How about taking a look at what the actual scientists are saying rather than desseminating propaganda put out by those with vested interests in burning of fossil fuels.
ON Fri, 12 Aug 11, 5:21am probably from Australia Reply to this comment
- Eco Guy said:
Yes, temperature has increased but it has more to do with being in a warming period after the last ice age than to do with the level of Co2 in the atmosphere, see my link - the Co2 is at a historical low compared to the historical record yet we are still here...
ON Fri, 12 Aug 11, 5:35am probably from United States Reply to this comment
- Eco Guy said:
Also we do care about the environment, but moderate that care with a hard logical based point of view on whats going on. I suggest you read 'Confessions of a Greenpeace drop out' by Patrick Moore if you really want to tune in to what this site is about.
ON Fri, 12 Aug 11, 5:38am probably from United States Reply to this comment
- Antonia said:
Climate changes all the time. Always has and always will. The only intelligent response to it is adaptation. The only problem with adaptation is that the Greens won't attain their fantasy world and shut down all the non-renewable power stations. This whole debate is political, not scientific. Remember too, that only rich countries can afford to clean up their environments; economic basket cases can't.
ON Mon, 15 Aug 11, 6:02am probably from Australia Reply to this comment
- Eco Guy said:
- Kel said:
So what if you are wrong? This is about the future and I think stopping putting billions of tons of pollution into the atmosphere is a good thing. No? Should we put in more to help the environment? It seems to me people like you want to be right more than you want to help others.
ON Wed, 11 Jan 12, 4:15am probably from Australia Reply to this comment
- Eco Guy said:
Hi Kel,
First off the level of Co2 in the current atmosphere is not 'pollution'. We basically do not know how much of the Co2 is level is directly due to burning fossil fuels - the methods of measurement are effected by natural processes that also influence the isotopic ratios (such as certain gases or bacteria). Also the current Co2 level was dangerously close to the 150ppm level, below which plants stop working...
I agree we should help the environment, but we should do that from a logical and fact informed basis. The current crop of 'green techs' have either Co2 neutral or negative footprints when you consider their whole life cycle. We instead need to focus more on dealing with localized environmental pollution and degradation - did you know that a third of the Chinese coastline is banned from fishing on due to pollution? And where are all the solar panels and wind turbines made....ON Fri, 13 Jan 12, 12:23am probably from United States Reply to this comment
- Bob said:
hi :)
ON Mon, 12 Oct 15, 4:04pm probably from Australia Reply to this comment
- Saveenergy said:
Fact: CO2 is not a pollutant, CO2 is in our every breath, in the carbonated sodas and waters that we drink and in the dry ice that helps us keep our food cold and safe. We breathe in 400 parts per million and then exhale 40,000 parts per million with no ill effects. We breathe the 40,000 ppm into victims needing CPR and it does not cause them to die! The monitoring systems in U.S. submarines do not provide an alert until CO2 levels reach 8,000 ppm which is higher that natural CO2 levels have been on Earth in the last 540 million years.
CO2 is a great airborne fertilizer which, as its concentrations rise, causes additional plant growth and causes plants to need less water. Without CO2 there would be no life (food) on Earth. The 120 ppm of CO2 added to the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution has caused an average increase in worldwide plant growth of over 12 percent and of 18 percent for trees.
There is not a single instance of CO2 being a pollutant. Ask any chemistry professor.
To put the “carbon” scare into perspective: CO2 has increased from about 3 parts in 10,000, to only 4 parts in 10,000 …. in 150 years.
How much of the total "Greenhouse Effect" is caused by human activity?....... Just 0.28% see graph http://tinyurl.com/pgjy5pm
Simple explanation here - www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
“Should we celebrate CO2?” Lecture by Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace. http://tinyurl.com/ou7eczxON Thu, 15 Oct 15, 6:56pm probably from United Kingdom Reply to this comment
Got a question or comment about this?
Find what you were looking for?.. Not quite what you expected?.. Got a question to ask people?Share your thoughts and use the form below to post a public comment right on this page.