SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Castle
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tejek who wrote (4579)3/14/2005 5:54:33 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 7936
 
Climatic conditions in rural areas can be effective in dissipating the greenhouse effects of methane

Methane and CO2 are greenhouse gases that have the ability to produce global warming. Global not local. The local climate is of minimal importance unless it somehow causes the gasses to settle out of the atmosphere (for example if it was cold enough CO2 would freeze and become dry ice, but if it was that cold global warming would not be high on our lists of worries). Smog is primarily a local, or at worst regional phenoma. Some of the components of smog might be greenhouse gases but they would also be so in isolation. Smog itself is not a special factor. The greenhouse gases don't require the actual formation of smog to be "effective". Smog doesn't play a leading role. CO2 and H20 do.

CO2 probably has more overall effect than methane but methane is pound for pound 20 times as powerful. The amount of methane in the air has about doubled since 1750. Here is a chart showing the rise in methane emissions.
umich.edu

Methane emissions are easier to control than CO2 emissions, both because it is not an inherent product of hydrocarbon burning and because for every pound you can reduce you get 20 times as much effect. For every dollar you put in to reducing methane emissions you will get more results than the same dollar put in to reducing CO2 production. If certain global scenarios turn out to be true than reducing the methane probably emitted probably will not be enough but it is the logical place to start as you get a lot more bang for the buck.

Tim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News