For the sake of argument, let's say that carbon emissions from human activity have nothing to do with global..

Question

warming/climate change. Can you think of other good reasons for cutting carbon emissions, or could we expect to increase them exponentially (what with increasing global human population, China and India seeking improvement in average lifestyle, more autos, energy consumption...etc.) for decades or centuries with no negative consequence to the global environment or our species?

Answer 1

stopping ocean acidification.[1]

fossil fuels are a non renewable resource so they will eventually run out so why not conserve what we have left. remember oil is used in everything today in one form or another.

also (slightly irrelevant) but carbon dioxide becomes toxic to humans at 0.5% (5,000 ppm) but we dont have enough fossil fuels to get it anywhere up there.

as one of your other answers said that CO2 will fertilise trees leading to better crop yealds but this only applys for non C4 plants. so if we do add more CO2 to the atmosphere it my give an advantage to those non C4 plants resulting in massive changes to ecosystems. [2]

Answer 2

Bob W sentiments mirror mine exactly.  20,000 years ago I would have been setting under 2,000 feet of ice.  And that stuff was all gone my the time the earliest people inhabited Missouri 13,000 years ago.  Maybe those Indians had to build big honkin' fires to cook up the wooly mammoths and caused the glaciers to melt.  

One fact everybody misses is that we (humans) aren't adding any "new" carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.  All of the carbon sequestered in fossil fuels came from where?  The atmosphere.  

Should we reduce our dependence on fossil fuels?  Yes.  Should we do our best to reduce emmissions?  Yes.  

There's one other thing I'm curious about.  For those of you who are chirping so loudly about carbon dioxide emmissions causing global warming, tell me this, have you cut back the number of miles you drive?  Do you drive slower than the speed limit in order to get better gas mileage?  Have you gotten rid of your big road barge SUV's and bought hybrid vehicles?  Cut back on electrical usage and replaced all of your incandecent bulbs with flourescent bulbs?  Do you turn out lights when no one in in the room?  How many of you have LP outdoor cookers rather than ordinary charcoal cookers?  Have any of you switched to wood heat or corn/pellet stoves to limit the so called "new" carbon you put into the atmosphere?  Surely you recycle aluminun cans don't you???  When you can say yes to all of the above, I'll shut my big mouth.  Until then, maybe you had better take care of your own backyard and stay out of everyone elses.

Answer 3

This is a good questions, take a star.

Oddly enough, even though I don't believe in AGW I think weaning ourselves from petroleum and other fossil fuels is a good idea. We do put CO2 into the air but only in small amounts relative to what nature does and many times CO2 levels were much higher than today and the Earth was in an Ice Age. Also, the pollution they put in the air has complicated the analysis even more and it's obviously not healthy.

So, whether it is the cause of climate change or not we need to develop alternative energy sources and save the oil. We may find a much better use for it in the future and burning it isn't a great use. We also need it to make plastic.

The problem is that one side tries hard to see both sides of the issue and approach it rationally. The other side is much more likely to call their opponents names, try to stifle debate, and create hysteria instead of solutions.

The argument that there could be too much CO2 for trees and other vegetation is empty since it would require higher levels than the world has ever seen. Plants still thrive at levels of 10,000 ppm, the highest it's been in the last 500 million years is only about 4,500 ppm and at present it's around 381. All animal life would die before CO2 began to hurt trees. As they 'suffocate' at around 300 ppm, you can see we're not far above the level at which plants would stop growing.

Most AGW skeptics just don't see the need to hand over all sovereignty to the UN and/or dismantle the modern world for a crisis that isn't proven and is in fact very unlikely. Those who claim that within 100 years global temp will rise dramatically need to take a look at this chart, see links.

Answer 4

The people who deny or decrease the influence of human emissions on CO2 either believe that the target is wrong and trying to reduce human emissions will have a huge economic cost or believe that trying to do anything is hopeless and it is the end of the world.

Answer 5

Obviously because there is a finite fuel supply they will be cut at some point, like it or not.  It's simple economics.  A finite, nonrenewable, resouce with a steadily increasing demand will lead to steadily increasing cost.

Rather than continuing paying these ever increasing costs why not invest in developing viable renewable alternatives such as orbiting solar power stations?

Answer 6

Have you noticed that almost every denier's answer is politically motivated?  They try to mask this by accusing environmentalists of it, hopefully most can see through this ploy.  

All the solutions that are being recommended for global warming are what we should be doing anyway.  We are destroying every ecosysem on earth, regardless of global warming.  Common sense says there are limits to how much poison you can spew in to the atmosphere and water and soil.

What most don't understand is how oil is ruining our economy also.  Some estimates of the hidden costs of oil are as high as $800 billion a year.

Just subsidies to oil companies and the military cost of protecting oil shipping add up to about $200 billion a year.  

The following links are studies on the real cost of oil.

http://www.setamericafree.org/saf_hidden...

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Ten_most_...

http://www.progress.org/2003/energy22.ht...

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/10-9-95/o...

Answer 7

Number one there is no global warming. It's a political plot to get you to vote and pay for politicians. Second, the only cure there is to this so called "Global Warming" is the extinction of the human race. Which by the way is what the earth is trying to do. We as humans are a plague to this Earth. We have done nothing but destroy it from day one. You want to save the Earth, stop multiplying.

Answer 8

Well - trees (which some people apparently like to hug) need carbon dioxide to survive.  

They use carbon in the air as a form of "food" - basically using carbon and sunlight to produce oxygen and food ("photosynthesis").

SO - carbon emissions are a way of "feeding" the trees.  Decrease carbon emissions significantly, and you are starving the trees.  

I think starving trees sounds cruel.  I'm going to go outside and let my truck idle in the driveway for a few hours.....

Answer 9

There's just so much money involved in fossil fuels with supply and demand in all that. Although I don't subscribe to the AGW theory, I can easily see that there are motives to stop the development of alternative fuel sources. In fact, I find it extremely hard to believe in over 100 years we have not been able to come up with some vastly more efficient alternative fuel sources. AGW may be a great way to overcome this unfortunate greedy quality in man. Maybe the only way other than waiting until fossil fuels are expended. Is it ok to lie for the right reasons?

Answer 10

Here is what I know.....Ice covered North America all the way down to northern Mississippi......Wooly Mammoths roamed and glaciers formed the Great Plains and they grew and then retreated.  We were locked in the Ice Age....Ahem!  The Ice is GONE.......Did the Cave Dwelling Humans drive SUVs and have fossil fuel power plants....Nooooooothey did not..Heating and cooling of the earth is cyclical.......

Global warming is political...POLITICAL and it is being shoved down our throats...have you experienced the huge price increases in foodstuffs because much of our corn and wheat is being diverted to Biofuels and ethanol..We are fools and following like sheep