Udon Thani Forum
Facebook twitter Youtube Rss
Udon Country Club

  • Advertisement

Climate meltdown in 10years !

Post your thoughts here if you are not sure where to post it!

Climate meltdown in 10years !

Postby izzix » September 5, 2006, 11:21 pm

Climate meltdown 'in 10 years'

The environment was one of the main subjects at the annual conference of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in Norwich:

A climate change timebomb may be just 10 years away from detonating, according to the latest evidence of global warming.

Data from a deep ice core drilled out of the Antarctic reveals a shocking rate of change in carbon dioxide concentrations.

The core, stretching through layers dating back 800,000 years, contains tiny bubbles of ancient air that can be analysed.

Scientists who studied the samples found they left no doubt as to the extent of the build-up of greenhouse gases.

For most of the past 800,000 years, carbon dioxide levels had remained at between 180 and 300 parts per million (ppm) of air. Today they were at 380ppm.
In the past, it had taken 1,000 years for carbon dioxide to rise by 30ppm during natural warming periods. According to the new measurements, the same level of increase has occurred in just the last 17 years.
Tests confirmed that the recent carbon dioxide had come from fossil fuel sources and must be due to human activity.
Dr Eric Wolff, from the British Antarctic Survey, who presented the findings at the conference yesterday, said: "The rate of change is the most scary thing.
"We really are in a situation where something's happening that we don't have any analogue for in our records. It's an experiment we don't know the result of."
Many experts recognise a "tipping point" of 440ppm of carbon dioxide, after which climate change starts to run out of control.
Although opinions differ, it was generally accepted that at some stage a "step change" is reached after which global warming accelerates exponentially, said Dr Wolff. The threshold could now be only a decade away.
"We could expect that tipping point to arrive in 10 years time," he told the meeting at the University of East Anglia.
The scientists conducting the research were from the European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (Epica).
The new core was twice as old as a previous one drilled by a Russian-led team near the South Pole.
Although the Russian Vostok core yielded valuable information, uncertainties remained. The new core has helped to fill the gaps.
Both cores showed clearly that greenhouse gas levels and climate change were coupled together. As carbon dioxide levels rose, so did global warming. Small changes amplified the effect.
The fact that this process occurred naturally offered little comfort, said the scientists, since the speed at which it was taking place now had never been seen before.
The ice core also showed a doubling in concentration of the second most important greenhouse gas, methane, in the last 200 years.
Prof Peter Smith, from the University of Nottingham, said there was an "urgent need" to find new technologies to reduce the impact of human activity on climate.
Another scientist pointed to evidence showing that natural "sinks" which soak up carbon were becoming less and less efficient.
Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are to some extent balanced by the carbon absorbed by the ocean and vegetation.
Dr Corinne Le Quere, from the University of East Anglia, said that as concentrations rose in the future, natural sinks were expected to have less effect.
The only efficient way to stabilise atmospheric carbon dioxide was to reduce emissions to zero, she said.

05 September 2006

**************
looks like it will get hotter in Udon in the coming years
User avatar
izzix
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 2770
Joined: November 30, 2005, 7:59 pm
Location: where can i find a GOOD brass

Postby farang » September 6, 2006, 12:16 am

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2006/s2624.htm

"We may still see very low ozone levels in the next few years, but the general tendency we're observing is that the atmosphere is starting to heal," said Weatherhead.

well,we will see i guess :?
User avatar
farang
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: July 4, 2005, 3:12 pm

Postby Dakoda » September 6, 2006, 6:18 am

Finally the word "exponentially" being used. And I thought we had twenty years left before it got really bad! (Whoops, guess that number is now down to fourteen, where did those six years go). One of the reasons I moved inland.

I would expect this Report will be edited and a couple of words will be removed, like others in the past :shock:


8)
User avatar
Dakoda
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 1550
Joined: July 4, 2005, 8:38 pm

Postby laphanphon » September 6, 2006, 7:10 am

the world has been coming to an end ever since it started. unless we nuke ourselves, i'm not concerned. all i need is 100 more yrs. nothing but gloom and doom, can't be bothered with what i can't control.
GOOD BYE CRUEL WORLD
User avatar
laphanphon
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 6002
Joined: July 4, 2005, 7:47 pm

Postby BKKSTAN » September 6, 2006, 7:59 am

:lol: I'm always amazed about ,how ''men of science''can be so divided about such a serious subject :!: Who are you to believe :lol:
User avatar
BKKSTAN
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 9223
Joined: July 18, 2005, 12:55 pm
Location: Nong Khai

Postby nevket240 » September 6, 2006, 9:54 am

Great article in last weekends Australian newspaper.
Largely debunks CO as a greenhouse gas. Faulty initial data now being used by "ego's" and funding junkies to keep themselves as they expect.

It is widely known, but not sexy enough, that water vapour is the greenhouse gas of choice if you were to build one. CO does not have the right properties to cause climate change. fact.

Apparently the earth was in a frozen state some 450 million years ago with CO 10 times higher than now. go figure.

Even the Australian and US governments will not sign a piece of Emotional Terrorism like Kyoto because of the lies and half truths behind it. Russia did not sign it because of their concern for the world. They signed to gain admission to the EU.

Fact-the number of extreme solar flares up to 1965 was around 15-16 pa. From 1965 they have averaged around 35. Double the energy blasts we receive, as well as the usual, and you have the culprit. Guess what, the claim is we have been warming up for , 40 yrs. :idea: :idea:

Has anyone asked why ALL the Green parties around the world are either Left or Extreme Left politically???????? :?:
User avatar
nevket240
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 457
Joined: March 1, 2006, 6:43 pm
Location: WERRIBEE

Postby BKKSTAN » September 6, 2006, 10:03 am

nevket240 wrote:.




Has anyone asked why ALL the Green parties around the world are either Left or Extreme Left politically???????? :?:

:lol: :lol: Easy one :roll: They are in opposition to the right :roll: Kind of like the media,looking for as much ''attention''as possible :lol:
User avatar
BKKSTAN
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 9223
Joined: July 18, 2005, 12:55 pm
Location: Nong Khai

Postby arjay » September 6, 2006, 10:43 am

nevket 240, I hope you mean CO2 (carbon dioxide) and not CO (carbon monoxide). Rest assured CO will kill you very quickly.
User avatar
arjay
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 8352
Joined: October 2, 2005, 12:19 pm
Location: Gone to get a life, "troll free"

Postby arjay » September 6, 2006, 10:49 am

Going back to the original posting, can someone tell, - sorry explain this - to Bush. My understanding was that he declined to ratify/support an important environmental agreement a few years back, presumably due to his conflicting business interests. :evil:
User avatar
arjay
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 8352
Joined: October 2, 2005, 12:19 pm
Location: Gone to get a life, "troll free"

Postby Bump » September 6, 2006, 11:44 am

Explain to George you are dreaming :shock:

By the way he will soon be unemployed. 8)
User avatar
Bump
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 4580
Joined: September 18, 2005, 6:58 pm
Location: Nam Som

Postby laphanphon » September 6, 2006, 12:01 pm

i'm sure he will follow in daddy's footsteps and be a lobbyist for saudi oil interest, the true financer of terrorism. but hands off, too many connections and far from a pushover as the iragi army/air force was.
GOOD BYE CRUEL WORLD
User avatar
laphanphon
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 6002
Joined: July 4, 2005, 7:47 pm

Postby BKKSTAN » September 6, 2006, 12:07 pm

arjay wrote:Going back to the original posting, can someone tell, - sorry explain this - to Bush. My understanding was that he declined to ratify/support an important environmental agreement a few years back, presumably due to his conflicting business interests. :evil:
:roll: Arjay,what business interests?America is not Thailand!The president business interests are transparent!The opposition would have him up for impeachment in a quick second,if there was the slightest hint that statement was true!

:) It one thing to disagree with his policies,another to infer facts that are not evident!I guess,since he was an oil man,you are infering that his interests might be slanted towards the oil businesses interest.That's possible,since the Republican party,in general, is less socialistic than the Democrats in their approach to economics.

:) Personally,I think his decision was based on what he thinks are best for the USA economically rather than his personal interests!I also think that he is a more honest and forthright politician than most.I don't like politicians that seemingly rely on the polls of the ''fickle''publics uneducated opinions,to make decisions!

:) We can all have our opinions,which are probably developed by listening to media hype,but none of us have as much information as a president!

:) The Kyoto agreement?
User avatar
BKKSTAN
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 9223
Joined: July 18, 2005, 12:55 pm
Location: Nong Khai

Postby BKKSTAN » September 6, 2006, 12:09 pm

arjay wrote:Going back to the original posting, can someone tell, - sorry explain this - to Bush. My understanding was that he declined to ratify/support an important environmental agreement a few years back, presumably due to his conflicting business interests. :evil:
:roll: Arjay,what business interests?America is not Thailand!The president business interests are transparent!The opposition would have him up for impeachment in a quick second,if there was the slightest hint that statement was true!

:) It one thing to disagree with his policies,another to infer facts that are not evident!I guess,since he was an oil man,you are infering that his interests might be slanted towards the oil businesses interest.That's possible,since the Republican party,in general, is less socialistic than the Democrats in their approach to economics.

:) Personally,I think his decision was based on what he thinks is best for the USA economically rather than his personal interests!I also think that he is a more honest and forthright politician than most.I don't like politicians that seemingly rely on the polls of the ''fickle''publics uneducated opinions,to make decisions!

:) We can all have our opinions,which are probably developed by listening to media hype,but none of us have as much information as a president!
User avatar
BKKSTAN
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 9223
Joined: July 18, 2005, 12:55 pm
Location: Nong Khai

Postby BKKSTAN » September 6, 2006, 12:26 pm

arjay wrote:Going back to the original posting, can someone tell, - sorry explain this - to Bush. My understanding was that he declined to ratify/support an important environmental agreement a few years back, presumably due to his conflicting business interests. :evil:
:roll: Arjay,what business interests?America is not Thailand!The president business interests are transparent!The opposition would have him up for impeachment in a quick second,if there was the slightest hint that statement was true!

:) It one thing to disagree with his policies,another to infer facts that are not evident!I guess,since he was an oil man,you are infering that his interests might be slanted towards the oil businesses interest.That's possible,since the Republican party,in general, is less socialistic than the Democrats in their approach to economics.

:) Personally,I think his decision was based on what he thinks is best for the USA economically rather than his personal interests!I also think that he is a more honest and forthright politician than most.I don't like politicians that seemingly rely on the polls of the ''fickle''publics uneducated opinions,to make decisions!

:) We can all have our opinions,which are probably developed by listening to media hype,but none of us have as much information as a president!
User avatar
BKKSTAN
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 9223
Joined: July 18, 2005, 12:55 pm
Location: Nong Khai

Postby BKKSTAN » September 6, 2006, 12:31 pm

arjay wrote:Going back to the original posting, can someone tell, - sorry explain this - to Bush. My understanding was that he declined to ratify/support an important environmental agreement a few years back, presumably due to his conflicting business interests. :evil:
:roll: Arjay,what business interests?America is not Thailand!The president business interests are transparent!The opposition would have him up for impeachment in a quick second,if there was the slightest hint that statement was true!

:) It one thing to disagree with his policies,another to infer facts that are not evident!I guess,since he was an oil man,you are infering that his interests might be slanted towards the oil businesses interest.That's possible,since the Republican party,in general, is less socialistic than the Democrats in their approach to economics.

:) Personally,I think his decision was based on what he thinks is best for the USA economically rather than his personal interests!I also think that he is a more honest and forthright politician than most.I don't like politicians that seemingly rely on the polls of the ''fickle''publics uneducated opinions,to make decisions!

:) We can all have our opinions,which are probably developed by listening to media hype,but none of us have as much information as a president!
User avatar
BKKSTAN
udonmap.com
 
Posts: 9223
Joined: July 18, 2005, 12:55 pm
Location: Nong Khai

Next

Return to Open Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

  • Advertisement