[CAMWEST-discuss] Peak oil may solve climate change

[Mark Robson]

Short and dirty answer,
 
Coal, coal and coal. There is 9 times enough coal in the ground to cause catastrophic GW,
not to mention tar sands, heavy Orinco oil and oil shale if they ever get desperrate enough to use it.
 
Business as usual = GW.
 
 
Just my 2c worth
 
 
Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: camwest-discuss-bounces at nicku.org [mailto:camwest-discuss-bounces at nicku.org]On Behalf Of Danny Hannan
Sent: Tuesday, 28 July 2009 5:37 PM
To: Ian Macindoe; Annie and Phil; camwest-discuss at nicku.org
Cc: Ross Macindoe; Gordon Hocking
Subject: Re: [CAMWEST-discuss] Peak oil may solve climate change


Thanks Ian,
While I agree with James Bunger's argument that CO2 levels will fail to continue rising after about 2025 due to the passing of peak production of all fossil fuels.  I disagree with his conclusions.
 
By 2050 several very eminent scientist have calculated that we will be down to 50% of our current energy budget and by 2100 20-25% of current energy budget.  Which also means 20-25% of current population.
 
Climate Change and Global Warming are two distinct but related issues that have both common and unrelated causes.  Global warming has both direct and indirect causes as does Climate Change some causes are anthropological and some are natural.  To solve both issues the two will need to be separated and each treated as a separate issue.
 
My reasons:
I question that increasing atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are causing global warming.  I have done back of the envelope calculations that show that the heat required to cause the global warming we do have is the same order of magnitude as the heat from the fossil fuels that we burn each year.
 
There is no quantitative data that I have been able to find that is hard evidence that increasing concentrations of CO2 is causing global warming.  CO2 has always been in the atmosphere and there appears to be no studies to measure the % of IR that is being absorbed by CO2 in the narrow wavelength bands that CO2 absorbs IR.  Is the CO2 window already 90% closed or only 10% closed, there does not appear to be an answer.
 
There are many gases like halogenated hydrocarbons that were not in the atmosphere 100 years ago.  The CFC or more correctly chlorinated and fluoridated hydrocarbons not only destroy the ozone layer but are powerful green house gases in their own right and the reduction of the ozone layer is causing additional radiation to reach the surface of the Earth and causing additional warming and positive warming feed back loops.
 
There are also natural cycles that do cause the Earth to warm and to cool.
 
There are too many possible causes for Global Warming to single out just CO2.
 
However:  By heavily directly taxing the use of fossil fuels we are attacking CO2 emissions at the source; also reducing the consumption of fossil fuels so that they are conserved for much longer; also making renewable power much more economically viable; and also reducing the heat released by burning fossil fuels.  A win, win, win, win.
 
A carbon trading system will never work, the primary purpose of any trading systems is for the profit of the traders; no one else.
 
I have attached my research and thoughts on Global Warming.
 
Dan
 

 
danny_hannan at yahoo.com 



  _____  

From: Ian Macindoe <imacian1 at bigpond.com>
To: Annie and Phil <anniphil at bigpond.com>
Cc: Gordon Hocking <geho7 at bigpond.com>; Ross Macindoe <r.macindoe at lisp.com.au>
Sent: Tuesday, 28 July, 2009 2:40:44 PM
Subject: Peak oil may solve climate change


This is very interesting.
Ian
Unrealistic expectations of fossil energy supply is but one glaring error in the climate change science.    [To read the full article, visit http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=9202 ]

  _____  

Access Yahoo!7 Mail on your mobile. Anytime. Anywhere. Show me how <http://au.rd.yahoo.com/mail/mobile/tagline/*http://au.mobile.yahoo.com/mail> .


Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Crane Group

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://nicku.org/pipermail/camwest-discuss/attachments/20090731/6c67ad88/attachment.html