Why is burning fossil fuel not counted as part of the carbon cycle. Like burning wood or making beer,?

Question

Boring it might be. But they tax you for it.

The Co2 levels are at there lowest for millions of years and were lot higher by a factor of ten, then. the expected rise in Co2 is 1to2% now, and we have no control over natural burning of fossil fuel.
or methane production

Answer 1

COSTINGS
and they need the income from coal.

Answer 2

Because the carbon in burning wood or making beer was extracted by plants not long ago from the atmosphere. Putting it back is no big deal.

But the carbon in fossil fuels was taken from the air many thousands of years ago, over a very long time. We're putting that back very fast, and that's a real problem.

When CO2 levels were high long ago, coastlines were different and agriculture was different. When climate changed migratory man could just move somewhere else.

Our modern society can't do that. Global warming will cost huge sums of money to deal with the changes, far more than reducing it would cost. And it would spark wars, as desperate people flee across national borders.

Answer 3

Because there is such a thing as methane and carbon cycle in our biosphere.

The concentration of CO2 has been quite constant for the last 1000 years.
The carbon and methane produced by living beings (humans, animals, vegetation) through their life and their decay has been recycled by the photosynthesis.

The fossil fuels have STAYED FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS IN THEIR GEOLOGICAL LAYERS AND DID NOT TAKE PART TO THIS CYCLE.

This is the reason why it is a very new thing that we use fossil fuels in a massive way and add so much carbon in the cycle.

The amount of greenhouse gases sets the average earth temperature. Greenhouse gases absorb the heat radiation from the Sun and increases the net heat balance of the earth.

The greenhouse effect is a good thing since without it we would all be frozen and all the earth would be covered by ice.

Too much greenhouse effect will probably be very negative.
And this is what we expect by the increased concentrations of greenhouse gases for which we are resonsible by burning so much fossil fuels.

Answer 4

The only idiots that don't count it are the Oil corporation fat cats who care more about the money they make than the survival of children. The burning of fossil fuels is the biggest degrader of the environment. The carbon locked up in coal is the excess that was emitted originally by volcanic action. Nature did exactly what scientists are trying to do CARBON SEQUESTRATION. The American Military burn more fossil fuel than any other two groups in the WHOLE world.

Answer 5

All sources of C02 (and methane etc) are calculated into the modelling for global warming. It's just that burning fossil fuel isn't counted as a natural source of C02.

I think what you refer to as the carbon cycle is only for cycles which is 'beyond human control' and 'natural'.

If you're really keen you could count the the carbon in the fossil fuel in a larger cycle going back to when the carbon was captured from the environment was locked away, of course the planet wasn't habitable by humans then.

Answer 6

Actually it is, but not publicized.

There are movements to discourage wood burning or have people place filters on the exhausted smoke.

In London England, they banned burning carbon fuels such as peat due to the smog problem.

The city is quite livable in comparrison to what it was in the early 1950s especially 1952 and 1953 when thousands of people died as a direct result of killer smog.

Answer 7

I don,t know what you mean but burning fossil fuels does more damage than the others.

Answer 8

fossil fuel is not counted i think because it is a reversable process that causes damage to the biosphere.

Answer 9

It could be that it's in a different league, being the most harmful of them.

Answer 10

dunno im not that boring to want to know .. lol