Environment - October 2007

Take global warming/sea level rise and possible technologies into account. Will people still live there or will it be abandoned? Will it be underwater? A floating city? Will buildings be on stilts? Will there be dykes or force fields to hold back the sea? Will it be like present day Venice, Italy? Use your imagination and provide appropriate details.

2007-10-02 16:01:07 · 10 answers · asked by bbwannab 2 in Global Warming

All stories and editorials are pro global warming.

2007-10-02 15:28:58 · 11 answers · asked by Steve B 1 in Global Warming

2007-10-02 15:16:26 · 8 answers · asked by josh.isaiah 2 in Green Living

I was horrified to see Rona employee - paint department dump a big drum of chemicals directly in the storm sewer that goes straight into the creek (and there are Atlantic Salmon and other fish in the creek this time of year)

Another one, my workplace has two "oil-drums" with some waste chemical stuff in it without lids, and if it tips...eeeew !!!

I don't want to cause people trouble (that Rona store paint employee, or my own employer, or my own job at my workplace), I just want to totally stop future damage. Where can I get results ?????????????

2007-10-02 14:55:18 · 3 answers · asked by million$gon 7 in Other - Environment

Welcome to another episode of 'Can You Spot the Lie?'

Here we have 4 statements about 4 seperate prominent global warming figures. 3 statements are true and 1 is a baldfaced lie.

Can you spot the lie?

Al Gore
a) Is one of the foremost climate scientists in the world.
b) Has a home which consumes a lot of energy.
c) His film - 'An Inconvenient Truth' - got basic global warming science right, though it focused too much on the worst possible scenarios.
d) Powers his home with renewable energy.

James Hansen
a) Is one of the foremost climate scientists in the world.
b) Accepts bribes from political figures to falsify data.
c) In 1988, accurately predicted global warming thru the present.
d) Warns of the dangers of global warming.

Richard Lindzen
a) Is an atmospheric physicist at MIT.
b) Believes we cannot determine if humans are the primary cause of the current global warming.
c) Believes that cigarette smoke doesn't cause lung cancer.
d) Once smoked 12 packs of cigarettes in one day.

2007-10-02 14:20:46 · 10 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Global Warming

Most people think that our activities are causing climate change. Obviously this is by accident, but it seems to me that the fact that we change the climate, even by accident, means we can change it on purpose. Do you think that this is something that is close to being possible?

2007-10-02 13:23:33 · 20 answers · asked by busterwasmycat 7 in Global Warming

I need some basic stuff about dangerous events that may happen if u live in the lower mainland, near the pacific ring of fire.

2007-10-02 11:30:51 · 2 answers · asked by JasN 1 in Global Warming

we r doing this project in science rite? well we hav to come up wit either:
1. ways to conserve energy for the skl
2. ways to save money for the skl
3. ways to make money for the skl
4 ways to recycle for the skl
if any1 has any ideas can u pleez tell me and they hav to b inexpensive and easy... thnx

2007-10-02 11:08:22 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Green Living

2007-10-02 10:42:00 · 11 answers · asked by a-lee-see-ya 2 in Green Living

2007-10-02 10:21:36 · 5 answers · asked by 11hazel22 1 in Other - Environment

Science has been wrong before.

2007-10-02 10:05:39 · 11 answers · asked by The Doctor 1 in Global Warming

I know that in some areas in the midwest, the methane that is given off from landfills is being used as energy to power the factories at the landfill. If we stored all the methane given off from our landfills, do you think we could use it as an efficent fuel? And if so, why do you think we aren't using it now?

2007-10-02 10:02:11 · 12 answers · asked by :) 4 in Alternative Fuel Vehicles

It takes pure water for electrolysis. Bottled or purified.
Should be done only when there is surplus energy, at off-peak hours.

2007-10-02 09:33:19 · 11 answers · asked by baypointmike 3 in Alternative Fuel Vehicles

2007-10-02 08:43:52 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

I own a large piece of woodland (around 200 acres), and I really want to sell it to this developer who wants to build some kind of mall there. But I have to clear the land first. So how do I get all those trees out of there?

2007-10-02 08:36:49 · 24 answers · asked by Uliju 4 in Other - Environment

I have seen this raised more than once by some sources that many find to be sketchy. I ask, not because I want to support them, but because it seems to be a logical question.

Can we actually do what it is said we are going to do (double CO2 concentrations by 2100 via fossil fuel usage)?

2007-10-02 08:34:06 · 11 answers · asked by Marc G 4 in Global Warming

I have a research paper on an endangered species. I decided on the red wolf because i LOOOOVE wolves, but i digress. My paper is supposed to be why we should save this species. I can't very well say that i want to save it because it is just-so-darn-cute! Can anyone out there think of any reasons? Also, any websites that might have recent news on the Red wolf would be appreciated. (I keep finding websites with conflicting information)

2007-10-02 08:28:15 · 12 answers · asked by Leah T 2 in Conservation

Do you simply feel that the evidence for AGW is not strong enough to draw a conclusion?

If so, don't you think that the potential consequences if the theory is correct warrant that action be taken to prevent it?

Or do you think there is sufficient evidence for an alternative explanation to be more likely, such as the Sun being the primary contributor?

If so, can you provide scientific evidence to support your theory?

2007-10-02 08:25:59 · 9 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Global Warming

i hate environmentalists. expecialy the ones that protest to STOP DRIVING all together..

well dipshits, what would we do with the highways? plant trees in them? what would we do about all the money that has gone into cars? all the stocks, the companys, stores, linked econommical systems. and all that other ****?

gettin rid of them completley would **** up the economy,

and during your protest you make like a million protesting signs...SAVE THE TREES, well **** face, what are those posters made of.

basicly my point is, IF EVERYTHING, that environmentalists wanted to happen...happened, alot of things would be ****** up.. for PEOPLE, in my opinon PEOPLE are more important for living then a coulple of deer, or cows. every time a cow farts it harms the layer..so lets save them all, make the gas 100 fold! right? idiots.

im okay if you want to talk about changing the world, but dont pressure me with this ****, part of the reason why people dont listen is because you force em to

2007-10-02 08:08:36 · 5 answers · asked by leroy jenkins 2 in Other - Environment

http://green.yahoo.com/

2007-10-02 07:18:48 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

2007-10-02 07:16:13 · 11 answers · asked by someguy 2 in Other - Environment

If so, please read the following paper, primarily from NOAA.

http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/reference/bibliography/2006/tmlw0601.pdf

After reading it please tell me, do you still think atmospheric data disproves the anthropogenic global warming theory? If so, why?

2007-10-02 07:13:22 · 9 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Global Warming

Some scientist believe that the world will have a huge natrual disaster is it true ?

2007-10-02 07:13:04 · 16 answers · asked by ananth r 1 in Global Warming

I think it should becasue that is all that global warming is. It is not casued by man at all. It is only a libearl plot to raise taxes.

2007-10-02 07:05:24 · 14 answers · asked by Rocketman 6 in Global Warming

What can be done to conserve water?

2007-10-02 07:03:21 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Conservation

America's thirst for fuel is at least partially based on that fact that families who have more than two children are unable to purchase a smaller car or SUV because they cannot fit more that two car seats in the second row. I am sure that engineers can come out with a slightly narrower car seat that is as safe or safer than current models. What do you think?

2007-10-02 06:03:53 · 10 answers · asked by Westport 2 in Alternative Fuel Vehicles

I'm looking to go greener with my cleaning. I want to get rid of all the chemical-y cleaners and bleach and stuff. I hear there are more eco-friendly ways to clean, but what are they? I keep hearing something about lemon juice!

2007-10-02 06:00:57 · 8 answers · asked by nikkilee911 3 in Green Living

The surface record finds warming of approximately +0.07°C per decade over the past century and +0.17°C per decade since 1979.

Deriving trends for the lower troposphere in which the stratospheric cooling is removed:

RSS v3.0 finds a trend of +0.181 °C per decade
UAH analysis finds +0.14 °C per decade

An alternative adjustment introduced by Fu et al finds trends (1979-2001) of +0.19 °C per decade when applied to the RSS data set. A less regularly updated analysis is that of Vinnikov and Grody with +0.22°C to +0.26°C per decade(1978 - 2002).

Links to each paper available here:

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

Graphically available here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Satellite_Temperatures.png

The UAH shows slightly less warming in the troposphere than the surface, all other studies show greater warming in the troposphere as models predict.

How is this evidence against the anthropogenic global warming theory, as Tomcat claims?

2007-10-02 05:43:55 · 7 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Global Warming

2007-10-02 05:40:15 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Alternative Fuel Vehicles

Any ice that is "floating" in water, as most of the Arctic icecap is, upon melting will not change the water level. Do this at home - fill a glass with water and ice, mark the water level, then let the ice melt. The water level remains the same (this is high school physics). So if every bit of Arctic ice that is over water melts, there would be no change to water level. Now ice that is supported by land (antarctica has a lot of that) is different. If that melts it would effect water level. But since most of Arctic ice is supported by water, how can it be claimed that the melting arctic icecap will change sea level to the point that Florida will disappear?? Can someone explain how I am wrong?

2007-10-02 05:38:37 · 17 answers · asked by Mind Bender 5 in Global Warming