Hey global warming bandwagon fanatics!!! We inhale oxygen we exhale_________???

Question

(its Co2 if you didnt know)

so if you breath too much......

Answer 1

Well I first thought, as I imagine everyone else reading this question, that "Socrates" was a bit of a tool.

Then I read Trevor's response and found that he appears to negate his own claim with his own numbers:

Number of vehicles in the world: 600 million (in 2001);

Average annual number of miles driven per car in the USA: 11000 (DoE 1994 estimates);

Average number of miles driven per car per day in the USA: 30 miles;

Extrapolating worldwide, total number of miles driven per day around the world: 18 billion (while this extrapolation is questionable, the number almost certainly sides on "excessive", as the USA is known to consume more per capita and per vehicle than the rest of the world);

Amount of CO2 produced in a day by all the cars in the world: 18e9mi * 0.8 kg / 4mi = 3.6 billion kilograms.

Global population 2000: 6 billion;
Amount of CO2 produced in a day by everyone breathing: 6e9*0.8kg = 4.8 billion kilograms.

You can argue the validity of these numbers until you're blue in the face. You won't change either figure by more than a factor or two, which means you cannot consider the effect of vehicles on global warming without considering the effect of the entire world's population merely breathing (not to mention all the other animals in the world who don't drive).

Maybe ol' Soc isn't as much a tool as I thought.

Answer 2

Humans, along with all respirating animals, under balanced conditions are carbon-neutral.

A tree consumes carbon-dioxide to use in photosynthesis to rpoduce energy for itself. It grows an apple. You eat the apple. Your body metabolizes the apple by using the oxygen you breath and produces carbon dioxide, which thn return the atmosphere to be used again. Eventually, you die, decompose, and become food fuel for all manner of organisms which continue the cycle.

This is a balanced system The carbon dioxide and other organic molecules are in a constant state of use->recycle.

However, humans no longer remain in balance. We are introducing massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere as a result of burning heavily carbon based fuels that were once trapped in other forms (e.g. pteroleum).

Our current rate of CO2 production as a result of industry is 150 times more than all the volcanoes on earth per year. Given the length of the typical carbon cycle (between 100-150 years) we are producing much more CO2 than is being absorbed by the environment.

The net result is more CO2 is remaining in the atmosphere, which in turns traps more infra-red radiation (heat). The rate of heat retention is logarithmic with the increase of CO2.

Other heat trapping gases, like water-vapor and methane aren't as much of a problem since their cycles are much shorter (methane is 12 years, for example, as UV radiation breaks it apart).

Global climate change is not the end of the world. However, we need to be prepared to deal with the consequences.

~X~

Answer 3

This question has been asked in these columns by several people, in several styles. This writer had answered the same on the basis of MATTER-ENERGY principles.

That Global warming is due to Greenhouse gases and their effects cannot be considered the only phenomena responsible for such impacts.

Let us closely look at the burning phenomena of Fuels - Petroleum, Wood, etc. In the case of Petroleum products, it should be noted that WHEN ONE KG OF PETROL/ DIESEL BURN IN AN AUTOMOBILE ENGINE, THE HEAT GENERATED IS ABOUT THE EQUIVALENT OF 11 KWH. However, the actual output utilized is only about 3.2 KWH, maximum. This means not less than 7 KWH heat units are spewed into the atmosphere when one kg of petroleum burns. Thus, in a city like Bangalore, for example, the estimated annual consumption of petroleum fuels consumed by automobiles alone is about 80 million liters. The HEAT SPEWED OUT BY SUCH VOLUMES OF FUEL BURNING WOULD AVERAGELY HEAT 2, 200 TONS OF WATER EVERY DAY TO REACH BOILING POINT FROM ROOM TEMPERATURE level...ALL THROUGHOUT 365 DAYS!!!

What does this mean to the environment? It is to be inferred that Bangalore City is responsible for spewing into the atmosphere a heat value equivalent to that needed to heat 2200 tons of water to boiling point, every day!. Add to this all the other heat LOSSES in every such burning/ heat process; the end result would be mind-boggling.

The conclusion should be: THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT THE WORLD's SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS SHOULD ATTEMPT NOW TO REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING IS TO EITHER REDUCE THIS HUGE HEAT SPEW FROM BURNING PROCESSES OR CONVERT THESE "LOSSES" INTO OTHER USEFUL FORM OF ENERGY TO AUGMENT OUR DAILY NEEDS. For example, in the case of Bangalore, the available HEAT SPEW from petroleum burning is of the order of NOT LESS THAN 1, 600, 000 KWH per day. even IF ONLY 50% OF THESE COULD BE TAPPED, ENERGY TO THE TUNE OF 800, 000 KWHe COULD BE SAVED EVERY DAY, REDUCING THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL DRAWALS THAT OCCUR NOW.

Such improvements in EFFICIENCY AND PRODUCTIVITY WOULD NOT ONLY HELP IN THE IMMEDIATE ENERGY NEEDS BUT IN THE LONG RUN THIS WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO OBLITERATE THE EFFECTS OF GLOBAL WARMING.

Thus, the idea that Carbon Di Oxide in the atmosphere creates or increases Global warming need NOT be very accurate hypothesis.

Answer 4

Variations in solar activity does cause some variations in temperature on earth. There are many factors. However, past climate changes are correlated with changes in greenhouse gases. Many factors contribute to climate change including albedo, cloud cover, plant life, etc.. Most scientists now believe that the warming of the last 100 yrs. has been caused by increasing greenhouse gas content in the atmosphere. Read some peer reviewed journal articles in paleoclimate to understand the material better :)

Answer 5

"We inhale oxygen we exhale_________???"

... a very small amount of carbon dioxide in comparison to all other forms.

Approx 800g per person per day; about the same that a car would produce if you drove for 4 miles.

In any event, gas exchange in respiration is part of a natural carbon cycle.

Bottom line - people who know about global warming know these things so you're fooling no-one but yourself.

-------------
EDIT
To Bridgejerk: My apologies, I didn't provide a very good answer. It would have been better to have explained it in more detail.

Each person exhales about 800g of CO2 per day as part of a natural carbon cycle (based on my research, Wikipedia puts the figure at 900g which is about right for the developed world where people are generally larger and respire more).

Each day through eating we consume nearly the same amount of CO2 (sequestered by plants and animals) approx 700g per day. The overall effect of breathing is therefore small, in the order of 100g per person per day. 6.5 billion people, 365 days a year = 237 million tons per year.

800g of CO2 is about the same that some of the cleaner cars produce if driven for 4 miles per. The Toyota Prius for example - 167g per mile.

Globally we added 29 billion tons of CO2 to the atmpsphere last year, about 2 billion from cars, 3 billion from trucks, 1.5 billion from planes and about 0.5 billion from all other transport (ships, trains, motorbikes etc). The other 22 billion is from industry, agriculture, power generation etc.

Overall breating contributes less than 1% of the total CO2 emissions (237 million of the 29 billion tons).

To put it into a different context - the total number of people who have ever lived is 110 billion (there's a popular misconception that there are more people alive today then throughout history but it's wrong). Assume overall life expectancy is 40 years (about half that of the modern developed world). On that bases 13 trillion tons of CO2 would have been exhaled - 70 tons of it for every square mile of Earth's surface. Fortunately there isn't because the vast majority forms part of the natural carbon cycle.

Answer 6

welldone you just figured it out too many people(overpopulation) will kill all of us .

here are some remedies to considder
population control in the past and present

War (past .present and future)
Natures way disease(today,past and future)
Manufactured disease(suspected today)
cures that kill(suspected today)
poisoned consumer goods (suspected today)
making children infertile or gay,by raising the PH level in drinking water or even drinks (suspected today)
birth control,(in the past the Olmecs women ate yams to make them infertile,today we have several methods but most reach only the educated ,i handed out condoms to an native Mazatecca comunity in oaxaca ,and the church retrieved them all )
education on birth control(not enough,again the poor regions are excluded )
laws that limit childbirth per family(China)

human sacrifice(Mayas ,Aztecs,druids),may be the best option ,it would remove the strain on Natural resources and make more available for survivers ,stop expanding populations from deforresting preciuous woods because of settlement and expanding farming
,take the pressure of drink water supplies ,there would be less need for Wars ,we could use the blood and remains to compost fields that were destroyed by irresponsible agriculture

and at the end of the day if we did it in a dignified manner we could have lots of religious parties and the Gods would be over the Moon

and we all could breathe more easily

Answer 7

Exactly my boy! If Gore meant what he said, he'd stop breathing! If you are interested in pursuing this subject and trying to stop the spread of untruths, do some research and keep posting wherever you can! E-mail me if you want- I have hundreds of links to scientific facts disproving all of the Gore camps convenient untruths.The real problems are deforestation, desertification and the extinction of sea life. Now THOSE are problems.

Answer 8

Your logic is correct and an increase in human(animal)population with decrease in tree cover does lead to rise in temparatures both physical (and mental in case of humans).

So stretching your logic one option could be to reduce human population that does not add any value to the society and earth.

Answer 9

Indeed we do Socrates, indeed we do. Of course, the pathetic amount we breath out is completely dwarfed by the massive amounts due to automobile use and industry. Making whatever point you were trying to get across trite and irrelevant.

Answer 10

carbon dioxide
so if breath too much of it u will hav muscle cramp(too much lactid acid produce) n even feel weaker soon invite to death..