Had a "plant based" chicken leg from the chippy today, it was absolutely lovely. The chippy owner assured me the chicken had been fed on nothing but corn since it hatched.
There's a reason we don't have 3 stomachs like cows, oh and we don't fart and burp enough to cause climate change either despite there being over 7 billion of us
The temperatures in 2021, now regarded as normal, would have been near record-breaking just over 30 years ago - before 1990, 2021 would have been the second-warmest year since records began in 1884. So, climate change means that recent temps would have been close to breaking a record over 30 years ago but not quite doing it. We also had the second warmest year in 136 years. Now i am terrified
My guess is, we can put science pretty high on the list of things you know **** all about though, eh?
During the prehistoric era, animals would have been vast sizes, eating lush vegetation, creating tons up on tons of methane, yet it took millions of years for them to be wiped out, but not by climate change, but a meteorite impact on the planet. Humans in comparison have been here on earth a very short time, if little time at all, we only hold records going back a few hundred years, not millions or billions, yet we are supposed to impact a planet where our predecessors never, so how do we know it's not just a natural cycle, and even if we are slowly turning it into an inferno, it will naturally regain it's cycle after we are gone, as it has done in the billions of years prior.
Not sure there were quite enough dinosaurs about to cause that problem mate but i see what you're getting at. Kill a cow today to save the world but ffs don't eat it
It's carbon dioxide that's the problem, not methane which is quite unstable and doesn't hang around that long. Carbon dioxide concentrations are rising mostly because of the fossil fuels that people are burning for energy. Fossil fuels like coal and oil contain carbon that plants pulled out of the atmosphere through photosynthesis over many millions of years; we are returning that carbon to the atmosphere in just a few hundred. Since the middle of the 20th century, annual emissions from burning fossil fuels have increased every decade, from an average of 3 billion tons of carbon (11 billion tons of carbon dioxide) a year in the 1960s to 9.5 billion tons of carbon (35 tons of carbon dioxide) per year in the 2010s, according to the Global Carbon Update 2021. Carbon cycle experts estimate that natural “sinks”—processes that remove carbon from the atmosphere—on land and in the ocean absorbed the equivalent of about half of the carbon dioxide we emitted each year in the 2011-2020 decade. Because we put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than natural processes can remove, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases every year. The more we overshoot what natural processes can remove in a given year, the faster the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide rises. In the 1960s, the global growth rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide was roughly 0.8± 0.1 ppm per year. Over the next half century, the annual growth rate tripled, reaching 2.4 ppm per year during the 2010s. The annual rate of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide over the past 60 years is about 100 times faster than previous natural increases, such as those that occurred at the end of the last ice age 11,000-17,000 years ago. Source - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, US Federal Govt.
Did NOAA really include that first line of your post as its very wrong? Methane is a potent greenhouse gas and while unstable, it actually breaks down to carbon dioxide and water in the atmosphere, so compounding the CO2 problem. The good news is though if we get rid of fossils fuels we also get rid of a significant percentage of the methane emissions as well. Then we just have to reduce cattle production, persuade @BobbyD to stop eating so much rice and concrete over some of our wetlands/peat bogs etc. The issues with carbon dioxide re-adsorption is that the two big natural sinks are the oceans and vegetation, particularly trees. In both cases we are ****ing up their ability to act as sinks. The solubility of carbon dioxide in water decreases with increasing temperature so as the oceans warm we release more CO2 back ( a sort of vicious cycle), and coral reefs which fix a lot of the carbonate are also becoming less effective due to coral bleaching. Cutting down large areas of jungle in the Amazon and elsewhere to raise cattle is then having a double edged effect on our climate. The loss of trees reduces the amount of carbon dioxide fixed from the atmosphere and the cattle raised on the cleared land are contributing to increased methane and subsequently carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We do know that there have been times when the earths atmosphere contained much more carbon dioxide than it does today and life flourished during those times. Trouble was it was mostly plants, which actually prefer higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than we have at present, and algae/bacteria which live in water so weren't as affected, and probably adapted as well. The speed of the increase is a real worry now as it makes it harder to adapt. I have a cylinder of compressed carbon dioxide in my office so I am experimenting with increased levels but suspect I won't be able to adapt in time.
Now that is a great and simple use of tech. Would be interesting to see the equipment powering it and know it's capacity for each stretch of road.
Climate change, Brexit or aliens? Not sure which one to blame for this one https://news.sky.com/video/giant-sinkhole-opened-up-in-chile-12664438
Did you spot the boot print on the surface at the end? (Was an image superimposed from the lunar landing. Had me scratching my head for a bit though)
