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

7 answers

In terms of exhaling CO2, absolutely nothing.

The CO2 you exhale was taken from the air recently by plants (there may have been an animal along the way, if you eat meat). Putting it back changes nothing.

It's very different from digging up carbon the natural cycle buried many thousands of years ago, and burning it. That's what hurts.

On the other hand, humans create CO2 by causing fossil fuels to be burned. More people, more fossil fuels burned. So population is a factor.

Just not by breathing.

More here about the importance of CO2 from various sources.

http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11638

2007-09-09 09:26:30 · answer #1 · answered by Bob 7 · 2 1

The theories that explain worldwide climate change are almost as varied as the weather. The more familiar ones attribute changes of climate to Olympian forces that range from geological upheavals and dust-belching volcanoes to long-term variations in the radiation of the sun and eccentricities in the orbit of the earth. Only the so-called carbon dioxide theory takes account of the possibility that human activities may have some effect on climate. This theory suggests that in the present century man is unwittingly raising the temperature of the earth by his industrial and agricultural activities.

2016-05-20 08:16:15 · answer #2 · answered by dinah 3 · 0 0

As far as the CO2 we exhale, not enough to matter. The effectsof population growth are indirect. First--all else being equal, more peopleuse more energy, which as long as we ccontinue to rely on fossil fuels, meansincreasing rates of CO2 ad other pollutant emission. Second, as formerly undeveloped parts of the world (mainly India and China) develop, theier incresing use of fossil fuels (China, primarily) also increases the rates of emissions.

The good news is twofold. First, the rate of population growth is declining, and is expected to zero out in a few decades. Second, we have most of the basic technology needed to stop using coal, oil, and natural gas. And the remaining technology is within reach. The biggest problemwe have is acutally political--both in the US and elsewhere--that being getting special interests out of the way so these new technologies can be implemented fully.

2007-09-09 10:08:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

None, because all the carbon dioxide exhaled by people originally came from the air. The plants that you eat to live took CO2 from the air as they grew. The meat you eat comes from animals that ate planets to live. This is different from burning coal or oil, which takes carbon that was originally under the ground and combines it with oxygen in the air to make CO2 in the air.

2007-09-09 10:03:24 · answer #4 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 2 0

Personally, I'd be a WHOLE lot less worried about peoples breathing, than the effect of the disposable diapers most of those babies are wearing. Breathing is kind of the least of it...


~Garnet
Homesteading/Farming over 20 years

2007-09-09 09:26:48 · answer #5 · answered by Bohemian_Garnet_Permaculturalist 7 · 0 0

Don't worry the US has the solution to this one
Invade other countries and kill everybody

2007-09-10 00:22:04 · answer #6 · answered by Dreamweaver 4 · 1 0

None what so ever.

2007-09-09 11:33:15 · answer #7 · answered by Beacon 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers