Comments on: Schellnhuber: developed countries are ‘carbon insolvent’ http://www.carboncommentary.com/2009/09/09/747 A critical appraisal of issues in the move to a low-carbon economy Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:02:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ben http://www.carboncommentary.com/2009/09/09/747/comment-page-1#comment-2535 Ben Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:56:39 +0000 http://www.carboncommentary.com/?p=747#comment-2535 'we cannot have zero carbon emissions nor would we want to. The planet would die as plants would be in CO2 deficit. Remember, they take the stuff in and give out Oxygen' You are implying that before humans began combusting wood and fossil fuels there were no plants on the earth, and if we suddenly stop burning fossil fuels the CO2 already in the atmosphere (where it will be for about a century) will disappear and the earth will die. Based on that I really can't take anything you say seriously and won't even try to convince you that the time to debate IF has passed. I'd be interested to know if the 750bn is purely CO2 or CO2 equivalent, including/excluding Montral Gases and Aerosols, does anyone know? ‘we cannot have zero carbon emissions nor would we want to. The planet would die as plants would be in CO2 deficit. Remember, they take the stuff in and give out Oxygen’

You are implying that before humans began combusting wood and fossil fuels there were no plants on the earth, and if we suddenly stop burning fossil fuels the CO2 already in the atmosphere (where it will be for about a century) will disappear and the earth will die. Based on that I really can’t take anything you say seriously and won’t even try to convince you that the time to debate IF has passed.

I’d be interested to know if the 750bn is purely CO2 or CO2 equivalent, including/excluding Montral Gases and Aerosols, does anyone know?

]]> By: Harbinger http://www.carboncommentary.com/2009/09/09/747/comment-page-1#comment-2526 Harbinger Thu, 10 Sep 2009 07:23:51 +0000 http://www.carboncommentary.com/?p=747#comment-2526 In a world based on carbon, the real meaning of the word organic, we cannot have zero carbon emissions nor would we want to. The planet would die as plants would be in CO2 deficit. Remember, they take the stuff in and give out Oxygen. Isn't that the stuff we breathe in? Oh my god and then we breathe out.....Carbon Dioxide. Holy Global Warming, Batman. This concept of a fixed container that is the earth, into which we can only put so much and only take so much is quite false, but is the basis for most environmentalism. It ignores the vast interactions between the oceans and the atmosphere, it ignores the effects of the sun, it ignores changes in the bio-sphere, because these things are not and cannot be modelled. Schellnhuber is quoting "spreadsheet science", not reality. He is seeking global governance via the UN and wishes to be a major part of the result. In a world based on carbon, the real meaning of the word organic, we cannot have zero carbon emissions nor would we want to. The planet would die as plants would be in CO2 deficit. Remember, they take the stuff in and give out Oxygen. Isn’t that the stuff we breathe in? Oh my god and then we breathe out…..Carbon Dioxide. Holy Global Warming, Batman.

This concept of a fixed container that is the earth, into which we can only put so much and only take so much is quite false, but is the basis for most environmentalism. It ignores the vast interactions between the oceans and the atmosphere, it ignores the effects of the sun, it ignores changes in the bio-sphere, because these things are not and cannot be modelled.

Schellnhuber is quoting “spreadsheet science”, not reality. He is seeking global governance via the UN and wishes to be a major part of the result.

]]>