Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sig who wrote (96637)	1/24/2005 7:10:08 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793670

Excellent point, Sig....

To: Sig who wrote (96637)	1/24/2005 8:51:37 PM
From: neolib	Respond to of 793670

I found estimates of 3M tons of particulates, 500M tons of CO2 attributed to those fires. Worldwide CO2 from all fossil sources was about 21.5B tons (1990). So it added 2.3% for the year. Given the debate wrt to decades of data I don't see any possibility of a 2.3% boost in one year showing up at all. BTW, particulates can have the opposite effect of CO2. The biggest issue I see from those fires would be the particulate ratio to CO2, which should be MUCH higher than clean burning power plants. But I don't have any data on that ratio. It is possible that those 3M tons were more significant than 2.3% CO2, and with a negative warming effect.