🧵 Global CO2 Emissions
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:54:25 UTC No. 16088291
When they stop increasing?
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:56:15 UTC No. 16088294
>>16088291
Not within our lifetimes
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:57:59 UTC No. 16088297
the permafrost in the tundra has already started to melt. we hit the point of no return. we can try to limit how bad it gets, but we fucked up bad.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 17:16:19 UTC No. 16088324
>>16088291
Hopefully never. More carbon is better for the planet.
The modern climate is one of the coldest in Earth's history. There is absolutely no reason to suppose the modern, pre-industrial climate is optimal in any sense for humanity or for the rest of the biosphere.
In the Devonian Period (400 million years back) beginning plants evolved to produce lignin, which in combination with cellulose, created wood which in turn for the first time allowed plants to grow tall for sunlight. Forests pulled down carbon as CO2 from the atmosphere to make wood. Lignin is very difficult to break down and no decomposer species possessed the enzymes to digest it. Trees died atop one another until they were 100 metres or more in depth. This was the making of the great coal beds around the world as this huge store of sequestered carbon continued to build for 90 million years. Then, fortunately for the future of life, white rot fungi evolved to produce the enzymes that can digest lignin and so the coal-making era came to an end. If it had not, CO2, which had already been drawn down for the first time in Earth's history to levels similar to today's, would have continued to decline until CO2 approached the threshold of 150 ppm below which plants begin first to starve, then stop growing altogether, and then die. Not just woody plants but all plants. This would bring about the extinction of most, if not all, terrestrial species, as animals, insects, and other invertebrates starved for lack of food. And that would be that. The human species would never have existed.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 17:59:52 UTC No. 16088367
>>16088324
>Humans die off and plants and fungus inherit the earth
Très basé
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 18:04:23 UTC No. 16088374
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 18:10:00 UTC No. 16088381
>>16088291
>1700s has ≈ 280 ppm CO2
>Today has about 400 ppm
Zomg rapid increase!!!!!
>Today CO2 percentage in air is about 0.04%
>1700s CO2 percentage in air is about.... 0.04%
OMG WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE IN 200 YEARS
^yes, climate scientists really are this delusionally retarded
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 18:20:58 UTC No. 16088393
>>16088324
>More carbon is better for the planet
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 18:26:55 UTC No. 16088402
>>16088393
>the only difference between earth & venus is the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere
KYS disingenuous faggot
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 18:50:49 UTC No. 16088426
>>16088402
Yeah plenty of stuff is different like their name. One is called Venus. One is called earth. One is close to the sun. The other is farther.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:05:58 UTC No. 16088444
>>16088402
>Venus and mercury both have surface temperatures of roughly 800+°F. Venus is 31.1 million miles
Gee I wonder why that is
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:07:00 UTC No. 16088445
>>16088444
>Further from the sun than mercury***
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:10:49 UTC No. 16088446
>>16088324
>More carbon is better for the planet.
>is better
What the fuck does that even mean? Inanimate and non-living things have no concerns. The planet and the laws of physics don't give a shit if there is more or less of CO2. The biome would, but it can't grasp such a basic concept either.
This really is about mankind, and only mankind. What kind of changes are we brunging about this planet, how will it change, and how will it affect everyone else in the future.
Life will carry on, one more mass extinction, big deal. Sorry humans, you fucked up
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:16:58 UTC No. 16088449
>>16088393
Based CO2 planet
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:07:05 UTC No. 16088497
>>16088291
CO2 emissions are already shrinking in many countries so we might achieve net zero by the end of the century if technological progress continues
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:11:04 UTC No. 16088591
>>16088291
Who counted co2 emissions? Graph seems fake
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:15:24 UTC No. 16088599
>>16088497
Net zero is impossible. CO2 is emitted by almost everything.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:22:01 UTC No. 16089162
>>16088444
Probably because it's atmosphere is hundreds of times denser than Earth's.
With an atmosphere that thick, with permanent sulphuric acid clouds that extend for 30 miles above the surface, Venus would be a boiling hell scape even with zero CO2.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 08:22:37 UTC No. 16089205
>>16088599
Actually it's only emitted by digging up fossil fuels and burning them.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:31:46 UTC No. 16089290
>>16088497
>for goods that are exported the emissions are subtracted
lol fuck off. You emit CO2 when you ship that shit across the world.
No amount of "technological progress" is going to change the fact that our economic model of endless growth is untenable. The only way out of this is to attack the system itself. Obsessing over CO2 emissions creates a perverse incentive where multinationals that manufacture useless consumerist junk and goyslop can pretend they're "climate neutral" because they bought carbon credits (a retarded scam)
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:35:15 UTC No. 16089293
>>16089205
Digging up and burning fossil fuels is a good thing. Biological and geological processes sequester carbon into the ground.
Carbon is necessary for life. If left unchecked, carbon sequestration would eventually kill most forms of life.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:39:00 UTC No. 16089295
>>16088497
Now do China for the same time period
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:33:40 UTC No. 16089328
they just startin
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:33:51 UTC No. 16089329
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 14:43:41 UTC No. 16089480
>>16089162
>Imagine being so retarded that you thought density was an infinite energy hack
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 14:51:02 UTC No. 16089490
>>16089480
Why is the dark side of the moon extremely cold, but not the dark side of the Earth?
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 15:59:50 UTC No. 16089559
>>16088291
I can't wait to be 80 years old (currently 25) on my deathbed because of microplastics in my blood, watching my grandkids play in outside during the 40°C winter days (the cold days of the year).
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Mar 2024 14:47:17 UTC No. 16091085
>>16088446
>Life will carry on, one more mass extinction, big deal. Sorry humans, you fucked up
Life won't carry on if CO2 drops below 150ppm. Carbon sequestration has been lowering atmospheric CO2 gradually for tens of millions of years - it has fluctuated up and down for various reasons, but until humans came along and began extracting and burning hydrocarbons, the global carbon cycle was gradually depleting itself.
Humanity is the saviour of life on Earth - if we hadn't evolved the intelligence and technology to extract and burn hydrocarbons and thus free the trapped carbon back into the biosphere, sequestration would have eventually caused atmospheric levels to fall beneath 150ppm and kill all plant life. Once all plant life dies, all animal life follows. The only lifeforms left would be chemosynthetic organisms around hydrothermal vents.
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Mar 2024 21:17:10 UTC No. 16091641
>>16088291
>Our World in Hebrew
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:54:35 UTC No. 16092835
>>16089490
Greenhouse gasses, moron. It doesn't have to do with the density of the atmosphere. If the moon had an atmosphere with the same pressure as Earth but had no greenhouse gasses, like an oxygen or pure nitrogen atmosphere, then it would cool off just as quickly.