Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Discussion > Climate Change & The Environment
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Climate Change & The Environment Discuss Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprints at the General Discussion; Originally Posted by FrancSevin Again, cut and parse conversations confuse what is said. If you cannot put your arguments together ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 05-28-2014, 12:28 PM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Virginia
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,833
Thanks: 3,272
Thanked 10,471 Times in 6,020 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
Again,

cut and parse conversations confuse what is said. If you cannot put your arguments together with cohesiveness, not much point. I didn't come here to play pong.

That said, most studies attempt to prove an agenda,a theory. Studies by the oppositio refuting those theories are the same. Best we can do is compare the logic of each to what facts we do know.

The NIPC continues to find data faults in the IPCC science. I get data updates from both. I continue to find the NIPC logic consistant with what I observe in real life.

The IPCC from the UN continues to claim Polar ice is melting. When you present them with the satilite photos to the contrary, they change thestory to "the Trend shows it melting."

The NIPC provides the evidence and allows you your own conclusions.

The IPCC asked for money to save the world. The NIPC asks for nothing but an open mind.
So let me get this straight. YOU are the one who brought the IPCC into the convo by stating they had oodles of evidence that acidification was NOT a negative thing. So apparently you thought they had some authority on the subject.

When I point out to you that the IPCC explicitly states that acidification is a serious threat, for some reason now you want to discredit the IPCC? The very establishment YOU referenced initially as being a good source of info?

LMFAO

It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about. If you'd like to actually show me FACTS that coral reefs are not dying, Or show me something that proves that excessive CO2 doesn't harm coral reefs, feel free. Until then though, perhaps you should educate yourself about the topic. I teach classes on it.

And what you observe in real life? What do you observe in real life regarding coral reefs? I can tell you what I have observed as a scuba diving instructor who has been diving on reefs for over 20 years. What have you observed?
__________________


Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 05-28-2014, 12:40 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,927
Thanks: 6,151
Thanked 8,759 Times in 5,046 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
So let me get this straight. YOU are the one who brought the IPCC into the convo by stating they had oodles of evidence that acidification was NOT a negative thing. So apparently you thought they had some authority on the subject.

When I point out to you that the IPCC explicitly states that acidification is a serious threat, for some reason now you want to discredit the IPCC? The very establishment YOU referenced initially as being a good source of info?

LMFAO

It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about. If you'd like to actually show me FACTS that coral reefs are not dying, Or show me something that proves that excessive CO2 doesn't harm coral reefs, feel free. Until then though, perhaps you should educate yourself about the topic. I teach classes on it.

And what you observe in real life? What do you observe in real life regarding coral reefs? I can tell you what I have observed as a scuba diving instructor who has been diving on reefs for over 20 years. What have you observed?
Actually, I misstyped. It is the NIPC of which I originaly spoke.


These guys.
Ocean Acidification's Impact on Coral Bleaching: How Great Is It?

Reference
Wall, C.B., Fan, T.-Y. and Edmunds, P.J. 2014. Ocean acidification has no effect on thermal bleaching in the coral Seriatopora caliendrum. Coral Reefs 33: 119-130. Authors Wall et al. (2014) write the effects of ocean acidification (OA) "have received considerable attention," but they say its "effects on photosynthesis of Symbiodinium within corals remain unclear." And, therefore, they decided "to test whether elevated pCO2 affects bleaching in corals."
Determined to discover "whether elevated pCO2 predicted for the year 2100 (85.1 Pa) affects bleaching in the coral Seriatopora caliendrum either independently or interactively with high temperature," Wall et al. collected specimens of the species from Nanwan Bay, Taiwan, and subjected them to combinations of temperature (27.7 vs. 30.5°C) and pCO2 (45.1 vs. 85.1 Pa) for 14 days," while assessing all pertinent biological responses of the coral.

The three researchers report that "high temperature reduced values of all dependent variables (i.e., bleaching occurred), but high pCO2 did not affect Symbiodinium photophysiology or productivity, and did not cause bleaching," either "individually, or interactively with high temperature."

As regards coral bleaching, in the words of Wall et al., "the present results clearly support a null effect for high pCO2." Or as they state in the final sentence of their paper's abstract, "short-term exposure to 81.5 Pa pCO2, alone and in combination with elevated temperature, does not cause or affect coral bleaching."


Archived 14 May 2014
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old 05-28-2014, 01:24 PM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Virginia
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,833
Thanks: 3,272
Thanked 10,471 Times in 6,020 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
Actually, I misstyped. It is the NIPC of which I originaly spoke.


These guys.
Ocean Acidification's Impact on Coral Bleaching: How Great Is It?

Reference
Wall, C.B., Fan, T.-Y. and Edmunds, P.J. 2014. Ocean acidification has no effect on thermal bleaching in the coral Seriatopora caliendrum. Coral Reefs 33: 119-130. Authors Wall et al. (2014) write the effects of ocean acidification (OA) "have received considerable attention," but they say its "effects on photosynthesis of Symbiodinium within corals remain unclear." And, therefore, they decided "to test whether elevated pCO2 affects bleaching in corals."
Determined to discover "whether elevated pCO2 predicted for the year 2100 (85.1 Pa) affects bleaching in the coral Seriatopora caliendrum either independently or interactively with high temperature," Wall et al. collected specimens of the species from Nanwan Bay, Taiwan, and subjected them to combinations of temperature (27.7 vs. 30.5°C) and pCO2 (45.1 vs. 85.1 Pa) for 14 days," while assessing all pertinent biological responses of the coral.

The three researchers report that "high temperature reduced values of all dependent variables (i.e., bleaching occurred), but high pCO2 did not affect Symbiodinium photophysiology or productivity, and did not cause bleaching," either "individually, or interactively with high temperature."

As regards coral bleaching, in the words of Wall et al., "the present results clearly support a null effect for high pCO2." Or as they state in the final sentence of their paper's abstract, "short-term exposure to 81.5 Pa pCO2, alone and in combination with elevated temperature, does not cause or affect coral bleaching."


Archived 14 May 2014
The study you referenced tested coral bleaching, which is different. Coral bleaching generally happens due to strong temperature fluctuations (most often), not CO2. Though some recent studies have shown that high CO2 can make the bleaching worse. Generally speaking though, it's a temperature thing.

This study Ocean acidification causes bleaching and productivity loss in coral reef builders took place over 8 weeks as opposed to the 14 day one you posted. It also has a sh*t load more information in it than the one you posted that basically said "we did this for a few days and nothing happened".


As CO2 levels rise in the waters, calcium carbonate levels decrease. It reduces the availability of the carbonate ion. This makes it difficult - or even impossible - for corals to build their skeletons. What they do manage to build, is weak. Those weak skeletons are then even more susceptible to the increased acidity of the water, causing them to dissolve over time. This is the effect of acidification. Bleaching is a response to stress wherein the corals eject their algae. Periodic bleaching in response to temperature fluctuations is normal. However, widespread, long-term bleaching is NOT normal and leads to high mortality for the corals.
__________________


Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old 05-28-2014, 02:49 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,927
Thanks: 6,151
Thanked 8,759 Times in 5,046 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
The study you referenced tested coral bleaching, which is different. Coral bleaching generally happens due to strong temperature fluctuations (most often), not CO2. Though some recent studies have shown that high CO2 can make the bleaching worse. Generally speaking though, it's a temperature thing.

This study Ocean acidification causes bleaching and productivity loss in coral reef builders took place over 8 weeks as opposed to the 14 day one you posted. It also has a sh*t load more information in it than the one you posted that basically said "we did this for a few days and nothing happened".


As CO2 levels rise in the waters, calcium carbonate levels decrease. It reduces the availability of the carbonate ion. This makes it difficult - or even impossible - for corals to build their skeletons. What they do manage to build, is weak. Those weak skeletons are then even more susceptible to the increased acidity of the water, causing them to dissolve over time. This is the effect of acidification. Bleaching is a response to stress wherein the corals eject their algae. Periodic bleaching in response to temperature fluctuations is normal. However, widespread, long-term bleaching is NOT normal and leads to high mortality for the corals.
first an apology. Between our server crashing and the Plant manager out sick, I keep getting called out onto the plant floor. It is hard to carry a conversation with so many interuptions. And I cannot access all my files right now to back up my opinions.

But I'll try.

NIPCC is a group of scientists not funded by government and not predisposed to prove AGW one way or the ther. Andthey report with sutdies that reaveal the effects of current climate trends and the Effects of Anthropolegic emmisions in the climasphere. Funding is mostly grassroots.

About the NIPCC

My apologies again for not using the correct acronyms.


I don't trust their findings over the IPCC but instead compare them. From that comparison I have come to this conclusion.

Climate change is real. Whether it is because of mankinds activities depends on who's hand is open and who's is demanding taxes be collected so they supposedly can fix it.

The government couldn't even make it rain on purpose. So I will err' to the side with the open mind telling me to prepare for warmer temps, better greener crops and severe weather patterns because there is more energy in the climate.

Thee have been no email scandals with the NIPCC. There have been no revealtions of hidden or altered data in their findings. Just a constant steam of real information without the terrorist tactics of change, pay taxes and fees, or die.

Last yer the worlds reknown scientist sonded the calrion,,,,Greenland's snow cap would melt withing weeks. then days. It never happened. But the same scientists have a consensus they can predict what wil happen in 20,,,,30,,,100 years "if we don't change our activities"

From the coming ice age predicted in the 40 yearrs ago, to the promise of snowless ice free polar regions by 2014, they have been dead wrong. Pardon my continued skepticisms.
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old 05-28-2014, 03:04 PM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Virginia
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,833
Thanks: 3,272
Thanked 10,471 Times in 6,020 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
first an apology. Between our server crashing and the Plant manager out sick, I keep getting called out onto the plant floor. It is hard to carry a conversation with so many interuptions. And I cannot access all my files right now to back up my opinions.

But I'll try.

NIPCC is a group of scientists not funded by government and not predisposed to prove AGW one way or the ther. Andthey report with sutdies that reaveal the effects of current climate trends and the Effects of Anthropolegic emmisions in the climasphere. Funding is mostly grassroots.

About the NIPCC

My apologies again for not using the correct acronyms.


I don't trust their findings over the IPCC but instead compare them. From that comparison I have come to this conclusion.

Climate change is real. Whether it is because of mankinds activities depends on who's hand is open and who's is demanding taxes be collected so they supposedly can fix it.

The government couldn't even make it rain on purpose. So I will err' to the side with the open mind telling me to prepare for warmer temps, better greener crops and severe weather patterns because there is more energy in the climate.

Thee have been no email scandals with the NIPCC. There have been no revealtions of hidden or altered data in their findings. Just a constant steam of real information without the terrorist tactics of change, pay taxes and fees, or die.

Last yer the worlds reknown scientist sonded the calrion,,,,Greenland's snow cap would melt withing weeks. then days. It never happened. But the same scientists have a consensus they can predict what wil happen in 20,,,,30,,,100 years "if we don't change our activities"

From the coming ice age predicted in the 40 yearrs ago, to the promise of snowless ice free polar regions by 2014, they have been dead wrong. Pardon my continued skepticisms.
I don't really care about any of those things. I was addressing ocean acidification and the fact that our coral reefs are dying. You can be "skeptical", but it doesn't change the fact that over 1/4 of our reefs are dead. You can remain "skeptical", but it doesn't change the fact that over half of the remaining reefs are damaged. You can remain "skeptical", but it doesn't change the fact that increased CO2 in the oceans decreases the availability of carbonate ions that corals (and shellfish) need to survive.
__________________


Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old 05-28-2014, 03:43 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,927
Thanks: 6,151
Thanked 8,759 Times in 5,046 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
I don't really care about any of those things. I was addressing ocean acidification and the fact that our coral reefs are dying. You can be "skeptical", but it doesn't change the fact that over 1/4 of our reefs are dead. You can remain "skeptical", but it doesn't change the fact that over half of the remaining reefs are damaged. You can remain "skeptical", but it doesn't change the fact that increased CO2 in the oceans decreases the availability of carbonate ions that corals (and shellfish) need to survive.
Well, there is more to global warming than corral reefs. And the jusry is still out on how much so called CO2 acidification is actually happening. A good many of those "remaining reefs" of which you speak are healthy and growing.

And it appears that elevated temps will not harm them.
http://www.nipccreport.org/articles/...feb2014a4.html

BTW not all coral bleaching is from warm water
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/coral_bleach.html

In order to be relavent and well funded, the AGW chaps have to present us with fearful scenarios. "The reefs are dying" is an old one from back whenthey actually were. But from pollution and recreational anchors breaking them up. Now that we have cured that, surprise surpise,,,,we have a new threat.

And when we cure that, we will have another "dire emergency"

Meanwhile the planet goes on, oblivious to the grandoise plans of man.

And the clowns shouting fire, about whom this thread is supposed to be,,,,, they all climb out of their private jets and take a limo to the chateau for brie and French wine. Leaving carbon footprints beyond comprehension.
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE

Last edited by FrancSevin; 05-28-2014 at 03:56 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old 05-28-2014, 03:59 PM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Virginia
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,833
Thanks: 3,272
Thanked 10,471 Times in 6,020 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
Well, there is more to global warming than corral reefs. And the jusry is still out on how much so called CO2 acidification is actually happening. A good many of those "remaining reefs" of which you speak are healthy and growing.


In order to be relavent and well funded, the AGW chaps have to present us with fearful scenarios. "The reefs are dying" is an old one from back whenthey actually were. But from pollution and recreational anchors breaking them up. Now that we have cured that, surprise surpise,,,,we have a new threat.

And when we cure that, we will have another "dire emergency"

Meanwhile the planet goes on, oblivious to the grandoise plans of man.

And the clowns shouting fire, about whom this thread is supposed to be,,,,, they all climb out of their private jets and take a limo to the chateau for brie and French wine. Leaving carbon footprints beyond comprehension.
Yes, I understand there's more to global warming than the reefs, but that is what you specifically addressed me with. I didn't speak to any of the other possible issues and really have no opinion on them. I have an opinion on the reefs because I personally understand their importance and the threats they face.

And no, "a good many" of the remaining reefs are not "healthy and growing". Over half are seriously damaged. The Great Barrier Reef, for instance, has seen a drastic drop in growth - larger than any other recorded time. The Florida reefs have been hit hard, with elkhorn and staghorn coral nearly gone. The entire Florida Reef system has seen a near 50% decline in the last 10 years. The growth of reefs across the entire Caribbean has dropped 80% over the last 30 years. Acidification is but one threat to the reefs, but it is still a significant one. Do you have any idea how long it takes for reefs to form? The damn things only grow from 1/10 of an inch to 4 inches a YEAR. So when we damage them, it can't be fixed right away. It takes a long f*cking time.
__________________


Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old 05-28-2014, 04:18 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,927
Thanks: 6,151
Thanked 8,759 Times in 5,046 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
Yes, I understand there's more to global warming than the reefs, but that is what you specifically addressed me with. I didn't speak to any of the other possible issues and really have no opinion on them. I have an opinion on the reefs because I personally understand their importance and the threats they face.

And no, "a good many" of the remaining reefs are not "healthy and growing". Over half are seriously damaged. The Great Barrier Reef, for instance, has seen a drastic drop in growth - larger than any other recorded time. The Florida reefs have been hit hard, with elkhorn and staghorn coral nearly gone. The entire Florida Reef system has seen a near 50% decline in the last 10 years. The growth of reefs across the entire Caribbean has dropped 80% over the last 30 years. Acidification is but one threat to the reefs, but it is still a significant one. Do you have any idea how long it takes for reefs to form? The damn things only grow from 1/10 of an inch to 4 inches a YEAR. So when we damage them, it can't be fixed right away. It takes a long f*cking time.
Yes, I understand how long it takes for a reef to grow. And that refs are sufering worldwide from bleaching. Much of which is natural

Reef Check Egypt: Extreme low tide caused coral death at South Sinai’s coast
Post date : 2007-06-28



Text and photos by Christian Alter
Red Sea Environmental Centre, Dahab

Tidal events belong to the most predictable natural fluctuations in coral reef habitats. They determine intertidal zonation patterns and limit the vertical growth of corals, but are rarely reported to cause mass mortality among corals. Corals are reported to tolerate a certain time of aerial exposure while enhancing mucus production to prevent desiccation. However, the combination of extreme low tides and high solar irradiances has the potential to cause widespread damage among corals. A report from the Great Barrier Reef reveals 40-75% of corals on reef flats were either bleached or suffered partial mortality from such an event.
We observed a similar phenomenon on reef flats in Dahab at the end of March this year and assume an additional factor has contributed to the coral mortality during this event. Within four days (March 19-22), absolute calm conditions coincided with extreme low tides and high solar irradiances. Moderate to strong wind speed would produce waves, surf and spray which may prevent corals from drying out and decrease the effect of strong insolation. We observed the coral mortality on reef flats of various sites in Dahab. Most likely this natural disturbance affected the whole coastline of the Gulf of Aqaba.

Many of the smaller coral colonies were killed completely whereas most of the larger ones only suffered partial mortality. It seems that coral tissues disintegrated and formed shreds hanging from the coral before getting washed away. First, the wall of coral skeleton became visible while tissue was still left inside. Understandably, the upper portions of colonies affected were more heavily damaged. Coral bleaching, in the sense of corals having ejected their symbiotic algae while retaining their elsewhere intact tissue, was not observed.


Partly affected colonies certainly are able to recover to a certain extent but have to struggle against algae quickly taking possession of any part of stripped skeleton. After one week all the affected colonies were tinted in shining dirty yellowish-green hues covering the white. We estimate the natural damage to coral colonies on the reef flat to be in the order of 25-75%. The first survey we did after the event revealed a mortality of 50 % at a known reef site south of Dahab.
Supplementary note:

We wish to underline that the observed decimation of coral cover has been caused entirely by natural processes. The observed phenomenon may not be distributed equally among reef flat zones due to natural variations in geomorphology and, thus, various degrees of exposure. The observed event and its assessment described in this article is restricted to relatively shallow reef zones. However, the observed decimation may not be very obvious and only recognized by trained persons.

Coral mortality, caused by the same low tide event was also observed by Dr. Moshira Hassan during an excursion with biology students from the American University of Cairo to Marsa Ghozlani (Ras Mohammed National Park) in early April this year. Similar events have been described earlier by the scientific community e.g. for the Red Sea (Fishelson, 1973) and the Great Barrier Reef (Anthony & Kerswell 2007).
Anthony, K. R. N. & A. P. Kerswell (2007) Coral mortality following extreme low tides and high solar radiation. Springer, Marine Biology, Vol. 151: 1623-1631.

Fishelson, L. (1973) Ecological and Biological Phenomena Influencing Coral-Species Composition on the Reef Tables at Eilat (Gulf of Aqaba, Red Sea). Marine Biology 19: 183—196.

If you want to discuss that subject in particular,,,as you claim, start a thread on it.

As for me, I have serious questins RE the OP. If all this crap you bleieve is true, how come the premptive spoksman for the movement, who has made tens of millions since his "inconvenient Truth" debut, after claimioing 20 foot seerises by 2014, bought a beach front houst in 2010?

Me thinks he didn't believe his own warnings.

Almost $9 million bucks so he could live by the ocean and watch it rise over his villa. Yeah, that's it. Or did he just want to live near all those Oprah Wimfrey type celebs who keep praising his prophecies?

What ever the true story is on Global warming, the royal priest of the movement is a carbon dripping sham. That is pure, laugh in your face, galling hypocrisy
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE

Last edited by FrancSevin; 05-28-2014 at 04:28 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old 05-29-2014, 03:21 AM
40yearfan's Avatar
Easy Living
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ.
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,970
Thanks: 2,617
Thanked 3,958 Times in 2,715 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
You can disagree all you want, but facts are facts.

HowStuffWorks "Green Myth 1: Planting Trees Will Fix Global Warming"
Not exactly a scientific journal. I've got one that says you can plant trees anywhere to absorb CO2:

Which Trees Offset Global Warming Best?

Quote:
Plant the Right Tree for the Right Location
Scientists are busy studying the carbon sequestration potential of different types of trees in various parts of the U.S., including Eucalyptus in Hawaii, loblolly pine in the Southeast, bottomland hardwoods in Mississippi, and poplars in the Great Lakes.

“There are literally dozens of tree species that could be planted depending upon location, climate and soils,” says Stan Wullschleger, a researcher at Tennessee’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory who specializes in the physiological response of plants to global climate change.
As you can see, this is an actual scientist who is studying global climate change.
__________________
__________________________________________
We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old 05-29-2014, 08:18 AM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Virginia
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,833
Thanks: 3,272
Thanked 10,471 Times in 6,020 Posts
Default Re: Study: Environmentalists Have ‘Substantially Worse than Average’ Carbon Footprint

Quote:
Originally Posted by 40yearfan View Post
Not exactly a scientific journal. I've got one that says you can plant trees anywhere to absorb CO2:

Which Trees Offset Global Warming Best?



As you can see, this is an actual scientist who is studying global climate change.
That's an article that speaks directly the types of trees that offset carbon best, not the location of the trees.
__________________


Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
average’, carbon, environmentalists, footprints, have, study, than, worse, ‘substantially

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0