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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pashkov who wrote (94526)	5/24/2008 2:58:18 PM
From: dybdahl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110194

Old news... I guess most people who are interested in this knew this already 10 years ago. However, afterwards, global warming accelerates. Anyway, the CO2 problem is not a global "warming" problem, but a global climate change, that will kill the most specialized species, make other species move geographically, introduce unpredictable weather with a higher frequency of natural disasters, reduce global food production, change country borders and ignite unrest. However, it is closely connected to the bigger problem, the reduction of biological diversity worldwide. The amount of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere is much larger than the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere - but until now, the emitted CO2 somehow disappeared into the oceans or somewhere else. Benefits include increased agricultural production in some places, and less ice problems for ships. The questions are: What can we predict, should we try to reduce CO2 emission, and how do we handle the effects. Economically, it seems to make sense to reduce CO2 emissions, and it makes sense to prepare for the effects already now when constructing new buildings, roads etc. However, the fact that the next decade may not have increasing temperatures, doesn't mean that we won't have less problems.