Global Warming

[Johnboy]

Hi Sue,
I so agree but I am not one for trawling the web I'm rather useless at that but somehow people manage to come up with some terrific sites. Lets hope they manage to on the subjects that we are talking about.
JB.

[richard p]

one of the biggest tips in somerset near castle cary collects its methane and generates from it. finished areas of the same tip are now the carymoor environmental centre. Somerset has in the past given away compost bins. The irony is that when you take waste to the recycling skips the staff wont let you take anything away, they claim its coumcil policy and they are monitored via the security cameras, ive often wondered whether the council would actually take anyone to court for stealing from the recycle skips

[sue-the-recycler]

Oh no! I sm s fervent 'skip diver' I always ask permission if I can but that sounds like madness - or like our local recycling site - the guys who work there take the stuff and get 1st shot at it so maybe its more to do with that than council policy

[richard p]

funny thing was i took a load of cardboard and tins down this saturday , one of the blokes that works there was on his day off unloading his own rubbish, his kid pulled a bike out the metal skip and shoved it in the car.!!!!

[Mr Potato Head]

I got one of my first computers out of a skip (an ageing BBC micro)... and look at me now!

[Mike Vogel]

I did see the programme. I also saw an article [I can't remember in which newspaper] from one of the scientists interviewed. He was rather angry that he had been misrepresented in the programme. It seemed that he was saying the phenomena were not much to worry about, whereas when he was spoken to his words were in an entirel;y different context, in which they meant almost exactly the opposite.

Others have since pointed out that the CO2 fluctuations were selected by the sceptical scientists and that other increases in CO2 have indeed occurred before a general warming. Your point about honesty is highly apposite.

Myself, I distinguish between CO2 production and more dangerous pollutants. The one is a naturally-occurring gas absorbed by the atmosphere. The others are man-made and have not previously been put out into the atmosphere.

The sceptics are right to question the one-sided view and the doom-mongers need to explain rises in CO2 levels before industrial times. I believe that other factors are involved in temp. fluctuations and the solar-activity evidence is interesting. However, never before has man been putting CO2 in large quantities directly into the air [air-to-air emission, so to speak], demolishing rain forest at quite such a rate, and simply BREATHING OUT in such large quantities. I believe that we are contributing to the warming of the planet but that other factors are also at work. I estimatte, on the basis of nothing whatsoever, that man's contribution is about 10% of the present causes.

mike

[Johnboy]

Smog was a killer. Fog a meteorological phenomena and Smoke man made and a combination of the two caused Smog. Smog was very prevalent in the late 1940’s and was getting worse year on year. People who had breathing difficulties were in great peril and many died. The government were called upon to do something to prevent it.
A scheme named The Clean Air Act was set up and in large urban areas Smokeless Zones were designated. At that time the normal method of heating in most domestic premises was by burning Coal in an open grate and Coke was used in the old Ideal Domestic Boiler for hot water. In the smokeless zones only pretreated fuels could be burnt. This meant that only fuels with various components taken out which was mainly Sulphur. The Sulphur content of Smog made eyes run and become puffy and also exposed skin could be very red as in a chemical burn. This action was to a degree successful in alleviating some of the problems. The public could see that the air was cleaner but was it actually solving the problem. IMHO it was more cosmetic than anything else. The real killer content of Smog was Carbon Monoxide CO which is generally the result of incomplete combustion of Fossil Fuels. Eventually the Annual Fogs decreased to an acceptable level and I remember 10 years after the passing of the Act I remember the politicians patting themselves on the back that “They” had got rid of Fog. In retrospect I feel that the fog was caused by layers of cold air caused by the mini ice age we experienced 1940 – 1975 and the ten year period after the act the earth’s temperatures had began to rise which actually saved the faces of the politicians of the day. And it was because of that the dense clouds no longer formed.
Central heating today is the “norm” but it was the clean air act that prompted the installation of central heating into most domestic properties and new buildings automatically had it. Now we are burning more fossil fuels and the consequences are being felt. The Clean Air Act has been amended several times over the years and more sensible parameters set. Emission test on vehicles as part of the MOT inspection each year and commercial boilers and domestic boilers in furnished accommodation must be serviced and certificate issued to guarantee its safety. I feel that every boiler in the land should be subjected to the same treatment because badly maintained boilers spill out CO due to incorrect burning rates. The trouble is that it would be a very unpopular move and none of the politicians are brave enough to take the right decision. Instead they are having a crack at the motorist with his CO2 emissions.
I feel that because CO2 is easy to calibrate it is easy to tax. But what does the taxation do to decrease green house gasses? The answer to that is not very much! Those with large vehicles can afford the extra tax and the burden left with those in the middle income bracket as usual.
The politicians have come down on CO2 as the arch-evil yet it only represents a very small percentage towards Green House Gasses. An awful amount of money time and effort is being wasted but what is it actually doing to prevent Global Warming.
The answer to that is BUGGER ALL.
JB.

[Gilly C]

got this off another forum thought it might amuse some of you
In the year 2007 the Lord came unto Noah, who was now living in England and said, "Once again, the earth has become wicked and over-populated, and I see the end of all flesh before me. Build another Ark and save 2 of every living thing along with a few good humans."

He gave Noah the CAD drawings, saying, "You have 6 months to build the Ark before I will start the unending rain for 40 days and 40 nights."

Six months later, the Lord looked down and saw Noah weeping in his yard - but no Ark.

"Noah!" He roared, "I'm about to start the rain! Where is the Ark ?"

"Forgive me, Lord," begged Noah, "but things have changed. I needed Building Regulations Approval. I've been arguing with the Fire Brigade about the need for a sprinkler system.
My neighbours claim that I should have obtained planning permission for building the Ark in my garden because it is development of the site, even though in my view it is a temporary structure.
We had to go to appeal to the Secretary of State for a decision.

Then the Department of Transport demanded a bond be posted for the future costs of moving power lines and other overhead obstructions to clear the passage for the Ark 's move to the sea. I told them that the sea would be coming to us, but they would hear nothing of it.

Getting the wood was another problem. All the decent trees have Tree Preservation Orders on them and we live in a Site of Special Scientific Interest set up in order to protect the spotted owl. I tried to convince the environmentalists that I needed the wood to save the owls - but no go!

When I started gathering the animals, the RSPCA sued me. They insisted that I was confining wild animals against their will. They argued the accommodation was too restrictive, and it was cruel and inhumane to put so many animals in a confined space.
Then the County Council, the Environment Agency and the Rivers Authority ruled that I couldn't build the Ark until they'd conducted an environmental impact study on your proposed flood.

I'm still trying to resolve a complaint with the Equal Opportunities commission on how many BMEs I'm supposed to hire for my building team.
The trades unions say I can't use my sons. They insist I have to hire only CSCS accredited workers with Ark-building experience.
To make matters worse, Customs and Excise seized all my assets, claiming I'm trying to leave the country illegally with endangered species.

So, forgive me, Lord, but it would take at least 10 years for me to finish this Ark."

Suddenly the skies cleared, the sun began to shine, and a Rainbow stretched across the sky. Noah looked up in wonder and asked, "You mean you're not going to destroy the world?"

"No," said the Lord. "The British government beat me to it.'

[madasafish]

Well of course one contribution to global warming is electricity distribution.

Ever wonder why the cost of a KWH from electricity is about 3 -4 times that of gas? Answer: because about 60% of all electricity generated is lost as heat from power lines and substations...
So we are heating the air naturally..and these are HUGE losses... much bigger than transport ...

And being politicians not one is suggesting we build local generating stations to reduce distribution losses.Instead they witter on about cars (where there are small savings to be made..)

[submariner]

In my paper this morning; was a picture of London, yesterday, wreathed in SMOG. It,the smog, came from the continent. My point being that it really doesn't matter what we do, we are bound by other countries. So whether it's CO2 or nuclear power stations, unless all the world is in harmony, what we do is small coal! Would someone please tell our "beloved" MP's, who, incidentally just voted themselves another £10,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Johnboy]

There are so many sources of CO2 that I wonder how all these so called calculations are made.
I heard on the radio yesterday that the normal household produces 6 tons of CO2 per year.
Every time we breathe out we expel CO2 into the atmosphere. Every leaf that falls in autumn gives off CO2. But how do they measure CO2 by weight!
Certainly you can find out how much CO2 there is in the atmosphere but you have to be an absolute Bl***y genius to tell where it has come from.
JB.

[alan refail]

It looks from this morning's news that the sceptics on causes of climate change may well have been deluding themselves.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm


"This should settle the debate," said Mike Lockwood from the UK's Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory, who carried out the new analysis together with Claus Froehlich from the World Radiation Center in Switzerland."

Fairly authoritative experts by the sound of it.

Alan