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 of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric who wrote (78264)	7/13/2017 6:07:38 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

The oceans are very large Eric. 300 tons of CO2 per second is nothing. Just the Gulf Stream sinks a lot. Check the total tons of water in the oceans and compare that with tons of CO2 absorbed per day or year. Make it a percentage. You'll need a few zeroes after the decimal point. You might like to compare CO2 absorption with H2O evaporation. 300 tons per second is nothing compared with H2O evaporation per second. The oceans aren't heating much at all in recent decades compared with coming out of the last glaciation and end of the Little Ice Age when a lot of ice also melted. There are good sea level charts that show the increase in depth over thousands of years. Sea level rose hundreds of metres. Now it's rising a couple of millimetres per year which is totally irrelevant to people. The only sea-level rise that matters is the sudden one that happens when there's an earthquake or volcano or landslide or bolide splashdown. Those multi metre instantaneous sea level rises are a very big deal. 10 cm per century is irrelevant. Or 20cm per century. Mqurice