English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i was flipping channels yeserday and i think it was fox 5 or something that said this. a guy had got a plan to make it better but everyone said no. what was his plan and why did they say no? please give details

2007-01-06 04:47:25 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Earth Sciences & Geology

12 answers

Hello,

ANS: The problem with global warming & carbon emissions is that aircraft engines produce a VERY high degree of damage to the atmosphere.

Why? because aircaft & air travel produce ALOT of CO2 and its been claimed that pollution from aircraft is especially damaging because the carbon emissions from aircraft goes directly into the upper atmosphere and so causes the damage in the worst places. Its the upper atmosphere where the CO2 has the worst effects.

**Aircraft CO2 emissions are said to be x3 times more polluting than any other form of travel.

For Example:- an average UK family home is said to produce around 3-4 tons of carbon each year but x1 journey to the USA & back to the UK produces about 60 tons of carbon alone.

**Its quite clear that aircraft travel is doing untold damage to our environment and adding a significant amount to global warming & CO2 emissions (forget Kyoto limits), Yet the UK government wants to expand airports all over this country (its madness IMO). Secondly the car & transport is the second major CO2 emitters, non of this is rocket science though.

IR

2007-01-06 05:06:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Jet engines burn 2-5 tons of fuel per hour. The CO2 produced is 3.66 times the wt of the fuel burned. There are thousands of hours of jet traffic over the earth every day!! CO2 is heavier than air. So it will slowly settle down from the upper atmosphere. Apparently not fast enough!!
Fuel burned on the earths surface does not rise into the upper atmosphere. H2O(water) is lighter than air and it does not go much higher than the mid 20,000 ft. Besides, plants take up CO2 instantly as they grow. CO2 is the major plant food. CO2 levels cannot be raised in greenhouses even by adding excess CO2 and remain high. The plants take it up too fast!! Since 85% of the Earth is ocean, the plants in the ocean are the vast majority of CO2 using plants. Trees and grasses are a minor factor in the usage of CO2!!
So, the major cause of global warming is jet traffic!! Can anyone disprove that?

2007-01-06 06:25:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Aircraft contribute just 2 per cent of greenhouse gases and will account for a maximum of 6 per cent by the middle of the century, even on ambitious projections of airline growth.

It is a total and utter diversion from the real problems caused by power generation and road transport.

Politicians tend to ignore coal and oil as not very easy or cheap to find solutions for and when it comes to road transport the heavy trucks and buses are the most polluting by far.

The aircraft industry has done more to cut pollution than any other energy users by far with the introduction of new more efficient engines and aircraft design.

2007-01-06 09:11:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

cat amongst pigeons springs 2 mind.

this politician's only saying what any fool could understand regarding global warming and increased air-traffic.
the UK was meant 2 b cutting EU emissions from 2000 onward, it kinda never happened.
typical of New Labour 2 stall, stall and stall some more.
or mayb b'liar thinks it's better 2 pay the fine than curb the planes and inevitable air-port expansions; rather than lose all that Tax money coming in as selfish folk demand cheap foreign travel.
i refuse 2 fly considering the damage it does and anyway i won't die if i don't have a holiday abroad, will i?
:)

2007-01-06 05:01:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

after 9 11 all internal flights were grounded in the USA , as a result the temperature increased by 3 degrees during the day and 3 degrees cooler at night due to the lack of aeroplane vapour

2007-01-06 05:11:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I think his plan said that everyone made the plan to beat the global warming overall and hear tangibly the outcome that would in effect destroy it, giving a detailed analysis of those bi products that cause expansion in the neutral waveband area.

2007-01-06 04:54:16 · answer #6 · answered by Spiny Norman 7 · 0 1

Gordon Brown jumped in and put an environmental tax on -starting January 1st 2007 - Happy new year

2007-01-06 05:16:02 · answer #7 · answered by Daddybear 7 · 0 0

Definately

2007-01-06 04:48:10 · answer #8 · answered by Jaffa1700 2 · 0 1

dont know...BUT - in our house we do everything possible to help global warming, recycling etc...and i am really annoyed that we are having to pay 20quid per head tax to go on a foreign holiday.

is it that the government have screwed to motorist to the hilt..and are now going to hit holidaymakers...20 quid is a start..but what next year? its just another way to bleed money out of us..and i object!!

2007-01-06 21:34:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Stop this global warming crap!!! Turning on a light bulb in your house emits co2 that contributes to global warming!
Farting contributes to global warming. Soon there will be farting police checking for criminals! AHHHHHH!!!!

2007-01-06 09:38:30 · answer #10 · answered by Speedoguy 3 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers