Could the world reduce its carbon output by people not breathing out for 10 minutes?

Question

In recognition of the (curiously overlooked) fact that the excess CO2 problem is exacerbated if not caused by the exponential growth in the world's population, wouldn't it dramatically reduce our global "footprint" if half the world's population were to stop exhaling CO2 (breathing out) for say, ten minutes?

Answer 1

Even if we do stop to consider, scientifically, what effect this might have, I think the main problem would be that most people can't hold their breaths for 10 minutes.

I also think that the CO2 we breathe out is considerably less than other contributors to the carbon footprint problem, but I really don't know for sure.

Answer 2

Another alternative would be to stay under water for ten minutes without breathing apparatus.

Answer 3

wouldnt the people die in the process?

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind...

Answer 4

this would definately work because the vast majority who tried this would'nt be breathing again after 10 mins, I thank you.

Answer 5

you have stumbled upon the REAL goal of global warming n***s.

They want us all to stop breathing - PERMANENTLY.

The Final Solution of the Global Warming n***s is to put us all into concentration camps and kill us off.

These n***s hate all humans equally, so that's how they justify themselves.

Answer 6

Yes, that would help a lot, since 10 minutes without oxygen would stop all future emissions from that half of the world's population.  

Global warming would then only be occurring at 1960 levels, which was already serious, but It'd be much easier to reduce the overall emissions of half as many people.

Answer 7

The more CO2 the more plants. Plants take in CO2 and give us O2 ,but keep the C which later will turn into oil & gas....

Answer 8

No, they need to not breath in for 15 minutes.

Answer 9

No.  The CO2 we exhale is part of the natural carbon cycle and thus does not contribute to global warming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycl...

Although since nobody can hold their breath for 10 minutes, that would kill everyone, so in that respect yes, it would reduce carbon output significantly.  Kind of counter-productive though.

Answer 10

yes defiantly because they'd all be dead.

Answer 11

Alarmists are the only ones concerned with carbon, so maybe they should give it a try.  An hour would be sufficient.

Answer 12

Ultimately the only way to cap emmisions is to cap people. We all need energy to live .... cooking, working, heat, clothing, transportation.

Caps on population will be the next proposal from environmentalists.

Answer 13

The obvious retort would be, You first.

Yes, if people could choose to die and execute that decision by not breathing, then all of our carbon uses would be cut a lot. But it would not cut our emissions in half. Our emissions are so heavily skewed that if half of the population died today, tomorrow we would find we have had a 20% reduction in emissions.

Half of North American people dying would have a much higher effect on emissions than a comparable number anywhere else would have.

So, the quick retort, "you first", may be appropriate if you are in N. America.

Answer 14

a little.

but it would work best if AGW deniers did it.

then the rest of us could get on with really reducing CO2.

Answer 15

Well probably, because most of the babies would be dead by the end of it.

Answer 16

I hope that's a joke,it is isn't it?

Answer 17

No,

The CO2 you exhale is your exhaust of your energy burned.  As long as you burn the same amount of energy, you should give off about the same amount of CO2.  So that big breath out will just contain 10 minutes of CO2.  

The amount of CO2 people give off can have an effect just like burning fossel fuels.  The effect is small, but just because it is natural, does not mean anything.  An example of this, the more people that can be in a room the more venalation.  If human and animal life expands, you must have an equal expansion of plant, etc. or else you will increase the footprint.

Answer 18

Thats a dumb, why don't you suggest that we kill off a number of people per week to reduce the carbon output.

Answer 19

Global warming is a LIE to line Al Gores pockets .

were actually on a global cooling trend and the whole thing is cyclical it goes hotter and colder on about a 30 year cycle.

and were in a cool year yeah! rain in so -cal.