Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(21,875 posts)
4. Does Plan B make the problem worse?
Thu Jun 13, 2013, 11:59 AM
Jun 2013

Last edited Thu Jun 13, 2013, 12:33 PM - Edit history (1)

Shouldn’t we address its root cause? Well, yes, we certainly should have, decades ago.

Unfortunately, I’m afraid it is too late to address the root cause.

We’re looking at 400 ppm of CO[font size="1"]2[/font] and rising.

Hansen and co suggested that we need to lower it, “to a level of 350 ppm or lower.”

Now, how are we going to do that in a timely manner? (Hansen and co. also warned, “If the present overshoot of this target CO[font size="1"]2[/font] is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects.”) If we stop all emissions tomorrow (based on ice core data) the levels may return to 350 ppm in as few as 50,000 years.


Recent discoveries tell us that the last time CO[font size="1"]2[/font] levels were about this high, temperatures in the Arctic were about 8°C warmer than today.

This tells me that we will need to find some artificial means of capturing and sequestering GHG’s.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Cheaper Ways to Capture C...»Reply #4