Will Global climate changes immediately improve with a drastic reduction of human CO2 emissions?

Question

I couldn't find an answer to this question:

will drastic state governmental efforts to quickly reduce human greenhouse gas emissions immediately improve or even stop climate changes and catastrophes without negatively affecting the current global economy?

Answer 1

Carbon in the atmosphere is not a problem, and the alarmists have been scamming us over this for a while now.  In fact, the warmest year in the last warming period was 1998.  Then the world stopped getting warmer.  Global warming ended.  The alarmists though will tell you the world is still getting warmer.  That, like everything else they tell us, is wrong.

No drastic measures are needed on CO2, or anything else.

Answer 2

Even if the AGW theory as it now stands were correct, then no, there would be no immediate effect.   Kind of like drilling in ANWR would not immediately affect supply - except that there's a futures market for oil, thus prices would come down.

Answer 3

NO, CO2 does not drive climate. The sun does. Have you noticed that the global temp is down almost .7 degrees even though CO2 is up? How could that be if CO2 drives the temp?

Answer 4

There is nothing immediate about global warming.  It required over a century of greenhouse gas emissions before the effects started to rise above the chaotic noise of the weather and any reduction of emissions will take decades or more before any noticeable effects.

Answer 5

As long as humans breath their will be no reduction in human CO2 emissions. The only solution is for everyone to stop breathing or at least hold their breath for longer and longer periods of time.

Answer 6

No - There is no relationship between co2 and climate temperatures.

No one knows what would happen if co2 levels were cut in half, or doubled.

Answer 7

The only thing this will do is to stop CO2 from increasing in our atmosphere. And that's even a maybe, since there are a lot of natural sources of CO2. Both the deserts and the oceans give off CO2 when their warm and absorb CO2 when their cool. In the long run there's not a viable way of combating those two huge sources of CO2 emissions and sequestering bodies. We could plant millions more trees, and cultivate blue-green algea (This little life-form combated high CO2 levels and helped create the atmosphere we now enjoy today. Here's my question that deals with these creatures: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

The thing is we can't do this quickly without hurting our economy and so far the government (like I expected them to do) have gone about things the wrong way, by wanting to increase taxes on places that give off the biggest amount of CO2 emissions. Without taking into consideration that these new taxes would be passed down to the consumer. Just like everything is increasing in price due to the higher gas prices.

The thing is automobile companies, power companies and any other company that deals with suppling something to people to survive on this planet are already doing things to find alternative sources to stop our dependence on oil. So all this Carbon Tax would do is hurt our economy even more and not do a darn thing to combat this unproven theory.

Answer 8

it would not immediately do so, it would gradually help. Global Warming didn't just immediately hit us, it is gradually getting worse, so i'm thinking changes would be gradual too. I believe drastic state governmental efforts would not affect the economy negatively, why would it, not doing anything about  is affecting the global economy negatively.