Rather than Climate Change, could CO2 present a more immediate danger?

[skarra]

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

[Two Bills]

Do people who keep on banging on about how bad the air is, not remember back to pre and post WW2 times.
As a kid growing up in those post war times, the air was foul, full of coal smoke, lead, sulfur, and God knows what else, and every winter, for sure here in the UK, thousands died from the smog and fogs it created.
In the mid 1950s a clean air act was passed, and slowly great improvements were made.
Nowadays emissions from industry and cars are minimal compared to those times, and as far as I can tell air quality has never been better.
I know climate is changing, only a fool would deny it, but all down to cars and industry?
I don't think so.
What happens if by some miracle we get to the Holy Grail of zero emissions and the climate continues to change?
Will enough ever be enough for the zealot industry?
Mother Nature must be laughing her socks off as she does her own thing.

[MorTech]

Carbon dioxide does not cause warming because it cannot hold heat - cuz its a heavy gas that stinks to ground level. Humidity holds heat so that would make atmospheric water a huge problem :) People working in greenhouses that burn propane to increase CO2 levels far beyond 1000 ppm are not suffocating...Are they? Early Homo species were surviving quite nicely with CO2 levels above 2500 ppm. Early mammals and dinosaurs at 8000 ppm.

If the planet ever warms to its optimal 69F temperature (It is at 60F today), then atmospheric CO2 will be about 1200 ppm. It is really too bad man can't cause global warming...It would be ideal.

[golfing eagles]

Carbon dioxide does not cause warming because it cannot hold heat - cuz its a heavy gas that stinks to ground level. Humidity holds heat so that would make atmospheric water a huge problem :) People working in greenhouses that burn propane to increase CO2 levels far beyond 1000 ppm are not suffocating...Are they? Early Homo species were surviving quite nicely with CO2 levels above 2500 ppm. Early mammals and dinosaurs at 8000 ppm.

If the planet ever warms to its optimal 69F temperature (It is at 60F today), then atmospheric CO2 will be about 1200 ppm. It is really too bad man can't cause global warming...It would be ideal.

Well said!!!!!!

Unfortunately, speaking the truth to the indoctrinated cultists will fall on deaf ears. And the power brokers that are manipulating these poor misguided folks will label you as Quixotic, while laughing all the way to the bank.

[Topspinmo]

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

Anything renewable or green made from mining and fossil fuels. Agree we could cut that level but the world has to be on same page. We in United States have the highest standards in world , until rest of world meets our standard there nothing we can do except going down same old road.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

the real and present danger is the collapse in biodiversity
example: kill enough bees and pollination falls far enough where it affects fruit and vegetable production.

but no need to worry, it won't completely collapse because increased CO2 helps plants and vegetation grow faster.

[mraines]

Anything renewable or green made from mining and fossil fuels. Agree we could cut that level but the world has to be on same page. We in United States have the highest standards in world , until rest of world meets our standard there nothing we can do except going down same old road.
So if your neighbor had trash all over his property, would you do the same? It's up to each of us to do what we can to clean up this planet.

[Bassdeer]

Keep buying your EV's, Have to keep the child slave labor digging for cobalt going in the Congo.

[Two Bills]

Anything renewable or green made from mining and fossil fuels. Agree we could cut that level but the world has to be on same page. We in United States have the highest standards in world , until rest of world meets our standard there nothing we can do except going down same old road.

Many would dispute that statement, and not be wrong.

[skarra]

Do people who keep on banging on about how bad the air is, not remember back to pre and post WW2 times.
As a kid growing up in those post war times, the air was foul, full of coal smoke, lead, sulfur, and God knows what else, and every winter, for sure here in the UK, thousands died from the smog and fogs it created.
In the mid 1950s a clean air act was passed, and slowly great improvements were made.
Nowadays emissions from industry and cars are minimal compared to those times, and as far as I can tell air quality has never been better.
I know climate is changing, only a fool would deny it, but all down to cars and industry?
I don't think so.
What happens if by some miracle we get to the Holy Grail of zero emissions and the climate continues to change?
Will enough ever be enough for the zealot industry?
Mother Nature must be laughing her socks off as she does her own thing.


I think you completely missed the point. It's not sulphur, mercury, and all those other nasties that could severely impact our health - it's also what you can't see. Think of Carbon Monoxide in your home - invisible and yet kills. We may think everything is "clean", but as CO2 levels rise you will find it harder to breathe and as Elon points out we will all start to suffer. Sort of like a frog in a pot of water slowly being brought to the boil.

My intent is to point out that besides climate change, elimination of biodiversity, and all the other problems a reliance on fossil fuels creates - CO2 is a very simple one to understand. It's easy to measure, and the charts make it very plain as to what is going on.

Maybe it's a case of the Millenials and Gen Z's will have to deal with this because we will all be dead when it starts to rear it's ugly head. But whatever the case, we (the not so "wise" old ones) are not leaving the world in a great place for our grand children.

[skarra]

Carbon dioxide does not cause warming because it cannot hold heat - cuz its a heavy gas that stinks to ground level. Humidity holds heat so that would make atmospheric water a huge problem :) People working in greenhouses that burn propane to increase CO2 levels far beyond 1000 ppm are not suffocating...Are they? Early Homo species were surviving quite nicely with CO2 levels above 2500 ppm. Early mammals and dinosaurs at 8000 ppm.

If the planet ever warms to its optimal 69F temperature (It is at 60F today), then atmospheric CO2 will be about 1200 ppm. It is really too bad man can't cause global warming...It would be ideal.


Now you're mixing the heating problem with the gas problem I'm highlighting.

Early homo sapiens have NEVER existed with CO2 levels at the 2500 PPM level, and the end of this century is nowhere long enough for us to evolve to be able to. You have to go further back than about 16 million years ago to see where it was higher than 1,000, but then it was dinosaurs that had to deal with it and not humans. In the 30,000 years we've been around, the levels were much lower than today.

You can do your own research to find out what effect CO2 levels has on us. But Elon got it right - it is dangerous to our health and we're not even talking about it. The higher the level, the less our lungs are able to remove it from our blood and you end up with the effects Elon highlighted.

[Two Bills]

I think you completely missed the point. It's not sulphur, mercury, and all those other nasties that could severely impact our health - .

You were obviously not around during the 40s and 50s!

[Number 10 GI]

How many PPM of C02 in the atmosphere will cause all the breathing problems being cited? Provide a bonafide source for this info and not someone's opinion.

[golfing eagles]

Anything renewable or green made from mining and fossil fuels. Agree we could cut that level but the world has to be on same page. We in United States have the highest standards in world , until rest of world meets our standard there nothing we can do except going down same old road.

Many would dispute that statement, and not be wrong.

We could split hairs about the who has the best among relatively similar standards, but it is irrelevant. The problem is China and India.

[fdpaq0580]

What happens if by some miracle we get to the Holy Grail of zero emissions and the climate continues to change?
.

What if? Let's give it a try and see! Or, we could sit on our thumbs and do nothing.

[Two Bills]

We could split hairs about the who has the best among relatively similar standards, but it is irrelevant. The problem is China and India.

For what it's worth, China, USA, India, then all the also-rans!

[Two Bills]

What if? Let's give it a try and see! Or, we could sit om our thumbs and do nothing.

Much of the world has been giving it more than a try for a long time, and "they" say it's still getting worse, despite all the improvements.
Maybe you could get Mother Nature to make a better effort.

[fdpaq0580]

Anything renewable or green made from mining and fossil fuels. Agree we could cut that level but the world has to be on same page. We in United States have the highest standards in world , until rest of world meets our standard there nothing we can do except going down same old road.

So, you recommend adopting the lowest standards rather than setting the highest? That's an interesting concept. 🤔

[fdpaq0580]

You were obviously not around during the 40s and 50s!

I was. You think the air is cleaner now? Thank the "tree huggers" of that era for they brought polution to our attention, forcing regulations to make big poluters clean up their act.

[fdpaq0580]

How many PPM of C02 in the atmosphere will cause all the breathing problems being cited? Provide a bonafide source for this info and not someone's opinion.

Why do some folks always want others to do the research and provide all the data? You want a statement fact checked, then you fact check it and you provide you findings. More often than not, "please provide" is just wasting your time and will deny any evidence and/or source as valid. It's mental "rope a dope", getting others to waste their time and energy. Hey, maybe you can cheat off Elon's notes?

[fdpaq0580]

We could split hairs about the who has the best among relatively similar standards, but it is irrelevant. The problem is China and India.

And? 😐🤨

[fdpaq0580]

Keep buying your EV's, Have to keep the child slave labor digging for cobalt going in the Congo.

OMG! 😒 Since when did you start caring, other than to use it as a guilt trip argument for big oil?

[fdpaq0580]

I think you completely missed the point. It's not sulphur, mercury, and all those other nasties that could severely impact our health - it's also what you can't see. Think of Carbon Monoxide in your home - invisible and yet kills. We may think everything is "clean", but as CO2 levels rise you will find it harder to breathe and as Elon points out we will all start to suffer. Sort of like a frog in a pot of water slowly being brought to the boil.

My intent is to point out that besides climate change, elimination of biodiversity, and all the other problems a reliance on fossil fuels creates - CO2 is a very simple one to understand. It's easy to measure, and the charts make it very plain as to what is going on.

Maybe it's a case of the Millenials and Gen Z's will have to deal with this because we will all be dead when it starts to rear it's ugly head. But whatever the case, we (the not so "wise" old ones) are not leaving the world in a great place for our grand children.

FYI! Often "missing the point" is intentional. Used to get one to chase red herring or present misdirection or misinformation. Tactical "thick headedness".

[fdpaq0580]

Much of the world has been giving it more than a try for a long time, and "they" say it's still getting worse, despite all the improvements.
Maybe you could get Mother Nature to make a better effort.

"Much of the world" isn't doing enough, and the other "much of the world" is short sighted simply trying to survive as the whole world around is getting less habitable.
And, Mother always liked you more..

[Pugchief]

Why do some folks always want others to do the research and provide all the data? You want a statement fact checked, then you fact check it and you provide you findings. More often than not, "please provide" is just wasting your time and will deny any evidence and/or source as valid. It's mental "rope a dope", getting others to waste their time and energy. Hey, maybe you can cheat off Elon's notes?

I think his point was there is NO answer, only opinions. You can't fact check when there are no facts. If someone does actually have an answer based on facts, let us know.

[Two Bills]

I was. You think the air is cleaner now? Thank the "tree huggers" of that era for they brought polution to our attention, forcing regulations to make big poluters clean up their act.

It's obvious the air is cleaner now. Nothing to do with tree huggers back then, at least in UK.
We were still struggling in the aftermath of WW2.
So many were dying from the stuff in the air, it was getting ridiculous.
When votes are at risk, things get done.

[Number 10 GI]

Why do some folks always want others to do the research and provide all the data? You want a statement fact checked, then you fact check it and you provide you findings. More often than not, "please provide" is just wasting your time and will deny any evidence and/or source as valid. It's mental "rope a dope", getting others to waste their time and energy. Hey, maybe you can cheat off Elon's notes?

When someone makes a claim, it is their responsibility to provide evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it is just oral diarrhea.

[Bassdeer]

OMG! 😒 Since when did you start caring, other than to use it as a guilt trip argument for big oil?
No, hate child trafficking more than oil, but I guess you're ok with it. I'll pray for you.

[Topspinmo]

So if your neighbor had trash all over his property, would you do the same? It's up to each of us to do what we can to clean up this planet.

It does no good for me to clean up my property when neighbors trash just blow on to mine. Just makes more work for me. The point was make neighbors clean up their yard, until, then no matter what I do the trash will keep coming cause I can’t force my neighbors to be good neighbors.

[Topspinmo]

When someone makes a claim, it is their responsibility to provide evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it is just oral diarrhea.

Opinions don’t need claims beside’s if look hard enough you can find some study to back up your claim. But I don’t have to agree with it.

[skarra]

How many PPM of C02 in the atmosphere will cause all the breathing problems being cited? Provide a bonafide source for this info and not someone's opinion.


How about the folks at Yale who point out some of the problems - https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2016/07/indoor-co2-dumb-and-dumber/ Or do some homework yourself rather that sitting back and letting others do the thinking and leg work for you.

AI engines return the following -
Cognitive performance
Exposure to 1,000 ppm or higher can negatively impact cognitive performance, such as decision making and problem solving.
Respiratory symptoms
Children exposed to CO2 levels above 1,000 ppm may experience respiratory symptoms.
Other health effects
Exposure to CO2 can also cause headaches, dizziness, tiredness, and eye irritation.


Ever heard and experienced getting a breathe of fresh air? What do you think that's all about? It's common sense.

As they say in the article - CO2 will cause people to get dumber and dumber. I think we already have a lot of that going on as we can see from the current politics.

[rsmurano]

drill baby drill. EVs are decades away from being practical. When I have as many chargers as gas stations, when I can charge an EV in the same time as it takes me to fill up a tank of gas, when I don’t have to wait hours being 3rd or 4th in line for a charge, when EVs aren’t so ugly, and when comparable cars cost about the same, then maybe I’ll look at them.

[Rocksnap]

I’d be a whole lot more worried about entities spraying god knows what into our upper atmosphere, then bombarding that with high energy to change/manipulate the weather. Think HAARP. Kind of puts a damper on all the climate alarmists. As in my humble opinion we all should be extremely concerned about that. It’s no coincidence these storms are so intense and record breaking.

DuckDuckGo (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=haarp+meaning&ia=web)

[CODYCAT]

What kind of damage is the manufacture of lithium batteries doing ?

[waterflower]

Then people might research weather modification. ( H A A R P.) Energy Frequency & Vibration, can be used for good or bad. Nikola Tesla

[cafesalsa1@yahoo.com]

We all want to improve the environment. All engineering disciplines are working to improve the environment. Sometimes mistakes are made (examples, forever chemicals and micro plastics). The human condition is to move forward and eliminate the mistakes that we learn from. The solutions we have come up with so far continue to be imperfect
Lots of work opportunities. Be optimistic!!

[opinionist]

CO2 is essential to the life cycle on Earth. Without CO2, plant life would die, and animals would soon follow. In a closed environment of a space vehicle or submarine, CO2 produced by humans must be removed, and oxygen consumed by humans must be replaced. The Earth's plant life performs this function without human intervention. If you want to fight against higher CO2 levels, plant a tree.

[Babufrick]

Spitting in the ocean without China and India climate compliance which will never happen

[Golfshopguy]

CO2 promotes plant growth. Plants and trees emit Oxygen which we breathe. Seems like a good system.

[HORNET]

Remember, THEY scared us with Acid Rain !!!

[Markus]

EVs consume some type of energy which has an effect on the environment. To think EVs will solve anything is really untrue. The ONLY way to help the environment is to consume less of everything. To become minimalists.

IF we wanted EVs to really help the environment we would have small vehicles and micro cars, not large SUVs and HUMMERS. We would not promote how fast they are 0 to 60. We'd have to relook at all of these mandated items that add weight to all cars. But that is not where we are.

[JRcorvette]

Our Climate has been changing sine the beginning of mankind. We are not causing it and we certainly can Not control it. Now send me your Money 💰

[CybrSage]

Why do some folks always want others to do the research and provide all the data?

It is always the responsibility of the claimant to support their own claim when asked.

It is never other people's responsibility to do it for the claimant.

[Topspinmo]

So, you recommend adopting the lowest standards rather than setting the highest? That's an interesting concept. 🤔


Where have you been for last 40 years? EPA has highest standards, why do you think companies leave USA. Greed, profit, and NO EPA standards to deal with.

[Topspinmo]

Many would dispute that statement, and not be wrong.

Ok, let’s see where are most polluted cities in world

Top 25 Cities with Worst Air Pollution (2023 Rankings) – Smart Air (https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/top-cities-worst-air-pollution/)

I failed to see ONE United States city?

[Topspinmo]

What kind of damage is the manufacture of lithium batteries doing ?

Don’t know it’s ok to destroy earth for lithium but not for stone, minerals mining, or drilling for oil and gas. Which required for EVERYTHING human’s need in this modern world.

[Topspinmo]

For what it's worth, China, USA, India, then all the also-rans!

Top 25 Cities with Worst Air Pollution (2023 Rankings) – Smart Air (https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/top-cities-worst-air-pollution/)

[Topspinmo]

"Much of the world" isn't doing enough, and the other "much of the world" is short sighted simply trying to survive as the whole world around is getting less habitable.
And, Mother always liked you more..

Top 25 Cities with Worst Air Pollution (2023 Rankings) – Smart Air (https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/top-cities-worst-air-pollution/)

[Topspinmo]

We could split hairs about the who has the best among relatively similar standards, but it is irrelevant. The problem is China and India.

Top 25 Cities with Worst Air Pollution (2023 Rankings) – Smart Air (https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/top-cities-worst-air-pollution/)

[EddieUA]

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.
So almost 100 years ago the area of The Villages had a hurricane with wind speeds of 161 to 205 mph. Was there as much climate change then then now? BTW EV's are heavier and go through guardrails on freeways and limited range and a decent one costs $100K. Will stick with my ultra low emissions vehicle rather then charge an electric car with coal fired power plants. See article: The Villages, FL Hurricane Map and Climate Risk Report | First Street (https://firststreet.org/city/the-villages-fl/1271625_fsid/wind)

[Laraine]

Now you're mixing the heating problem with the gas problem I'm highlighting.

Early homo sapiens have NEVER existed with CO2 levels at the 2500 PPM level, and the end of this century is nowhere long enough for us to evolve to be able to. You have to go further back than about 16 million years ago to see where it was higher than 1,000, but then it was dinosaurs that had to deal with it and not humans. In the 30,000 years we've been around, the levels were much lower than today.

You can do your own research to find out what effect CO2 levels has on us. But Elon got it right - it is dangerous to our health and we're not even talking about it. The higher the level, the less our lungs are able to remove it from our blood and you end up with the effects Elon highlighted.

The charts show an increase of about 100ppm in 60 years, so assuming you're correct about the problems with CO2, your time frame is a little off to reach 1000ppm. At the rate on the charts, you're looking at 360 years, or close to the end of the 2300's, not the 2000's. Also, to those mentioning carbon monoxide poisoning, that is CO, not CO2--there's quite a difference.

[Laraine]

What if? Let's give it a try and see! Or, we could sit on our thumbs and do nothing.

The problem with giving it a try, is quickly eliminating fossil fuels will ruin economies, and create mass starvation around the world--exactly what we're supposedly trying to stop. Of course, that may be the idea--many of the people pushing climate change are the ones who were also predicting doom and gloom from overpopulation, like Paul Erlich, who've been proven wrong time and again. Maybe they want to starve off half the population. Or there's the WEF, that is pushing for a system with a small number of elites, and billions of serfs, who own nothing, and eat bugs for food. Read their web site, or listen to what they say.

[biker1]

If the current rate of annual increase, about 2.5 ppm per year, were to continue, we would be around 600 ppm at the end of the century. This could translate to about 2-3C of anthropogenic change in the mean global surface temperature anomaly.


The charts show an increase of about 100ppm in 60 years, so assuming you're correct about the problems with CO2, your time frame is a little off to reach 1000ppm. At the rate on the charts, you're looking at 360 years, or close to the end of the 2300's, not the 2000's. Also, to those mentioning carbon monoxide poisoning, that is CO, not CO2--there's quite a difference.

[SHIBUMI]

If we could only control the cow flatulence all of these issues would be resolved. Simply would take a flatulence bag diaper on cows to get this done. It would reduce the bad air expulsion by 75%. This is doable. Not so sure it wouldn't do the same for this post. :BigApplause:


We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

[jimjamuser]

Carbon dioxide does not cause warming because it cannot hold heat - cuz its a heavy gas that stinks to ground level. Humidity holds heat so that would make atmospheric water a huge problem :) People working in greenhouses that burn propane to increase CO2 levels far beyond 1000 ppm are not suffocating...Are they? Early Homo species were surviving quite nicely with CO2 levels above 2500 ppm. Early mammals and dinosaurs at 8000 ppm.

If the planet ever warms to its optimal 69F temperature (It is at 60F today), then atmospheric CO2 will be about 1200 ppm. It is really too bad man can't cause global warming...It would be ideal.
The earth's average temperature NOW is 59 deg F and it is rising due to Climate Change. Co2 molecules and methane DO get to the upper atmosphere. Read about the greenhouse effect to understand it. It is pretty complicated. Here is a simplified version - Sunlight hits the Earth. Then infrared heat energy bounces UPWARD from earth. In the upper atmosphere CO2 and methane gases BOUNCE some of the infrared wave energy back to earth, which contributes to the Greenhouse Effect.

[jimjamuser]

the real and present danger is the collapse in biodiversity
example: kill enough bees and pollination falls far enough where it affects fruit and vegetable production.

but no need to worry, it won't completely collapse because increased CO2 helps plants and vegetation grow faster.
The Earth is warming and increased CO2 and methane are the problem.

[jimjamuser]

I think you completely missed the point. It's not sulphur, mercury, and all those other nasties that could severely impact our health - it's also what you can't see. Think of Carbon Monoxide in your home - invisible and yet kills. We may think everything is "clean", but as CO2 levels rise you will find it harder to breathe and as Elon points out we will all start to suffer. Sort of like a frog in a pot of water slowly being brought to the boil.

My intent is to point out that besides climate change, elimination of biodiversity, and all the other problems a reliance on fossil fuels creates - CO2 is a very simple one to understand. It's easy to measure, and the charts make it very plain as to what is going on.

Maybe it's a case of the Millenials and Gen Z's will have to deal with this because we will all be dead when it starts to rear it's ugly head. But whatever the case, we (the not so "wise" old ones) are not leaving the world in a great place for our grand children.
True. A good post.

[Two Bills]

Top 25 Cities with Worst Air Pollution (2023 Rankings) – Smart Air (https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/top-cities-worst-air-pollution/)

Yep, but the subject was countries.

[jimjamuser]

I was. You think the air is cleaner now? Thank the "tree huggers" of that era for they brought polution to our attention, forcing regulations to make big poluters clean up their act.
The US made improvements in air quality. But since 1950 world population exploded (look at a graph) and cause more automobiles and factories to spew out more CO2 and methane which has caused world temperatures (especially in polar regions) to go up rapidly in the last 5 years. Also, rapid sea level rise, which can only be explained by Global Warming. Look at a graph of world temperatures for the last 30 years to see the rapid rise.

[jimjamuser]

drill baby drill. EVs are decades away from being practical. When I have as many chargers as gas stations, when I can charge an EV in the same time as it takes me to fill up a tank of gas, when I don’t have to wait hours being 3rd or 4th in line for a charge, when EVs aren’t so ugly, and when comparable cars cost about the same, then maybe I’ll look at them.
Electric Vehicles have the potential to cost MUCH less, because their engines have only about 40% of the parts as an IC engine vehicle. And circular motion means they last longer.

[fdpaq0580]

If we could only control the cow flatulence all of these issues would be resolved. Simply would take a flatulence bag diaper on cows to get this done. It would reduce the bad air expulsion by 75%. This is doable. Not so sure it wouldn't do the same for this post. :BigApplause:

Catalytic converter suppositories for cows.
Or little gas sensors with electronic ignitor that would burn the gas when the cow farts. Might need to pull their tails out of the way of the butt flames

[jimjamuser]

We all want to improve the environment. All engineering disciplines are working to improve the environment. Sometimes mistakes are made (examples, forever chemicals and micro plastics). The human condition is to move forward and eliminate the mistakes that we learn from. The solutions we have come up with so far continue to be imperfect
Lots of work opportunities. Be optimistic!!
True, but look at a graph of world population. Rapid increase after 1950.

[jimjamuser]

CO2 is essential to the life cycle on Earth. Without CO2, plant life would die, and animals would soon follow. In a closed environment of a space vehicle or submarine, CO2 produced by humans must be removed, and oxygen consumed by humans must be replaced. The Earth's plant life performs this function without human intervention. If you want to fight against higher CO2 levels, plant a tree.
But, can you plant trees faster than the world human population is growing ???????????

[jimjamuser]

EVs consume some type of energy which has an effect on the environment. To think EVs will solve anything is really untrue. The ONLY way to help the environment is to consume less of everything. To become minimalists.

IF we wanted EVs to really help the environment we would have small vehicles and micro cars, not large SUVs and HUMMERS. We would not promote how fast they are 0 to 60. We'd have to relook at all of these mandated items that add weight to all cars. But that is not where we are.
That would work as long as world population dialed back to around 6 billion.

[OhioBuckeye]

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

I heard one Dem. say it would take 93 trillion to fix global warming, how well they pay Mother Nature? Some people think 1 trillion is candy sucker money. Well 1 million is 999 (thousand) 9 hundred, &999 dollars + $01 to make 1 million. You would have to do this again to make 1 billion, Then you would need 999 (billion)999 (million) 999 (thousand) dollars plus $.01 to make 1 trillion dollars & you would have to do this 93 times. One trillion is 1,000,000,000,000,000. 93 times, & that means taxes would cost every person in America $23,000. a yr. for every person alive today to pay for it until we all die!

[blueash]

Top 25 Cities with Worst Air Pollution (2023 Rankings) – Smart Air (https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/top-cities-worst-air-pollution/)

You have now posted this link as a reply four times. It has nothing to do with what the post was about. There were comments about what nations produce the most CO2 pollution which an entirely different question than air pollution in a city which does not even take CO2 into account. Air pollution at the level of a city is about dirty stuff in the air.

There were also comments about which nation has the highest requirements for pollution control. Again a totally different issue than what the air is like in a particular city.

[fdpaq0580]

Remember, THEY scared us with Acid Rain !!!

THEY? THEY? 🤔 Oh, yeah! They. 🙄

[fdpaq0580]

Our Climate has been changing sine the beginning of mankind. We are not causing it and we certainly can Not control it. Now send me your Money 💰

Nice try!

[fdpaq0580]

It is always the responsibility of the claimant to support their own claim when asked.

It is never other people's responsibility to do it for the claimant.

Bullspit! Believe it, or don't. If you don't, then you figure it out. Simple as that.

[fdpaq0580]

Where have you been for last 40 years? EPA has highest standards, why do you think companies leave USA. Greed, profit, and NO EPA standards to deal with.

Right here, most of the time. And I agree with you! So what does that tell you about corporate big wigs. They care nothing about you or anyone. They care nothing about doing the right or ethical (or "Christian") thing. Nothing stands in the way of money and power. And what do we get? A recycled old slogan, misinformation, lost jobs and a dirtier planet.

[fdpaq0580]

The US made improvements in air quality. But since 1950 world population exploded (look at a graph) and cause more automobiles and factories to spew out more CO2 and methane which has caused world temperatures (especially in polar regions) to go up rapidly in the last 5 years. Also, rapid sea level rise, which can only be explained by Global Warming. Look at a graph of world temperatures for the last 30 years to see the rapid rise.

True!

[fdpaq0580]

But, can you plant trees faster than the world human population is growing ???????????

And destroying the forests we do have. I mean what little we still have.

[fdpaq0580]

I heard one Dem. say it would take 93 trillion to fix global warming, how well they pay Mother Nature? Some people think 1 trillion is candy sucker money. Well 1 million is 999 (thousand) 9 hundred, &999 dollars + $01 to make 1 million. You would have to do this again to make 1 billion, Then you would need 999 (billion)999 (million) 999 (thousand) dollars plus $.01 to make 1 trillion dollars & you would have to do this 93 times. One trillion is 1,000,000,000,000,000. 93 times, & that means taxes would cost every person in America $23,000. a yr. for every person alive today to pay for it until we all die!

Sounds like a lot! So, you got any suggestions to help? Like solar or wind power to supplement and, ultimately replace fossil fuels. Reducing waste, planting trees, recycling, etc. Or, do we waste time and energy sitting around and bitchin' about the cost, which may not be as bad as it sounds if we all pull together?

[Topspinmo]

You have now posted this link as a reply four times. It has nothing to do with what the post was about. There were comments about what nations produce the most CO2 pollution which an entirely different question than air pollution in a city which does not even take CO2 into account. Air pollution at the level of a city is about dirty stuff in the air.

There were also comments about which nation has the highest requirements for pollution control. Again a totally different issue than what the air is like in a particular city.

I’ll post it 100 times it I want.

[fdpaq0580]

I’ll post it 100 times it I want.

Post it enough times to bring your post count to an even 15,000! Just a suggestion.

[jimjamuser]

Right here, most of the time. And I agree with you! So what does that tell you about corporate big wigs. They care nothing about you or anyone. They care nothing about doing the right or ethical (or "Christian") thing. Nothing stands in the way of money and power. And what do we get? A recycled old slogan, misinformation, lost jobs and a dirtier planet.
I agree for the most part. Except GOOD Government can "stand in the way of money and power". There are laws against monopolistic behavior, for example. There are laws about clean air in the US used by the EPA. The question is - Do we always have Good Government decisions. in the US it is most of the time, but NOT always. Another example of the importance of voting. We also need a well functioning public education system so that the most number of citizens are able to understand the modern complex problems. Money spent on having a well educated America is money well spent.

[fdpaq0580]

I agree for the most part. Except GOOD Government can "stand in the way of money and power". There are laws against monopolistic behavior, for example. There are laws about clean air in the US used by the EPA. The question is - Do we always have Good Government decisions. in the US it is most of the time, but NOT always. Another example of the importance of voting. We also need a well functioning public education system so that the most number of citizens are able to understand the modern complex problems. Money spent on having a well educated America is money well spent.

Well said!

[Stu from NYC]

I agree for the most part. Except GOOD Government can "stand in the way of money and power". There are laws against monopolistic behavior, for example. There are laws about clean air in the US used by the EPA. The question is - Do we always have Good Government decisions. in the US it is most of the time, but NOT always. Another example of the importance of voting. We also need a well functioning public education system so that the most number of citizens are able to understand the modern complex problems. Money spent on having a well educated America is money well spent.

If only the Dept of Energy was effective in educating our children

[Pugchief]

Bullspit! Believe it, or don't. If you don't, then you figure it out. Simple as that.

I have been on many forums over the years, and proper ETIQUETTE has always been that any poster asserting a position always supported that position with links to the credible sources from which information was obtained. Failure to do so was considered the equivalent of lack of credibility.

It's a free country (at least it used to be), so you can post in any manner you choose. But proper protocol always dictates that everyone should link to their own claims.

[Pugchief]

Except GOOD Government can "stand in the way of money and power".
There is no such thing. Only NECESSARY government. The less they get involved with, the better.

We also need a well functioning public education system so that the most number of citizens are able to understand the modern complex problems.
That ship has sailed. You want critical thinking, but today's public education is more about indoctrination. That's why there is increasing demand for school choice and home schooling. When you have large numbers of kids that can't read or do math, the system has failed.

[in2it17]

It is astonishing someone still thinks CO2 is having any effect on the climate. This has been discredited by real accredited scientists who do not accept money from corporations, leftist groups, government entities, or NGOs.

[lpkruege1]

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

So, 400 parts per million, is equal to 0.04% of our atmosphere. Plants require CO2 to produce oxygen.
While plants can utilize a range of CO2 levels, the optimal percentage for most plant life is considered to be around 0.03% or 300 parts per million (ppm), which is close to the current atmospheric concentration; however, increasing CO2 levels within a reasonable range can often boost plant growth in controlled environments like greenhouses up to around 1000 ppm.
Key points about CO2 and plant life:
Minimum level:
Plants can still photosynthesize at lower CO2 levels, but their growth will be significantly reduced.
Optimal level:
Most plants experience maximum photosynthetic activity around 300-1000 ppm CO2.
According to research, the minimum CO2 concentration considered necessary for plant life is around 150 parts per million (ppm), below which plants struggle to survive and reproduce effectively; at extremely low levels, photosynthesis would be significantly hampered and plants could die off.

So, this is me analyzing those numbers. If the plants die off below 150 parts per million, and stop producing oxygen, at what level do scientists agree we should we reduce CO2 to? How much CO2 is actually manmade compared to forest fires, volcanos, and other natural releases of CO2?

[JMintzer]

If only the Dept of Energy was effective in educating our children

I would rather the Dept. of Educations was effective in education our children...

The Dept. of Energy should concern itself with making sure we have plentiful and affordable energy...

[JMintzer]

There is no such thing. Only NECESSARY government. The less they get involved with, the better.


That ship has sailed. You want critical thinking, but today's public education is more about indoctrination. That's why there is increasing demand for school choice and home schooling. When you have large numbers of kids that can't read or do math, the system has failed.

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:

[Topspinmo]

Post it enough times to bring your post count to an even 15,000! Just a suggestion.


15001, if I want try to get 50000 posts knock someone off home plate, or maybe the first to 100000. Heck why not try for million. Notice I don’t don’t like anybody telling me what to do on public forum where B s rules.

[Topspinmo]

Yep, but the subject was countries.

And what countries are these cities in? O wait we don’t count cities in countries.

[Topspinmo]

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:


Second that. :beer3:

[fdpaq0580]

I have been on many forums over the years, and proper ETIQUETTE has always been that any poster asserting a position always supported that position with links to the credible sources from which information was obtained. Failure to do so was considered the equivalent of lack of credibility.

It's a free country (at least it used to be), so you can post in any manner you choose. But proper protocol always dictates that everyone should link to their own claims.

Glad you have such vast forum experience. Here is my experience on this forum. When asked to provide proof or give an answer or name credible sources, and having done so, the opposition simply "poopoos" says that answers is wrong, proof isn't acceptable and sources (like NOAA, UN, NATO, NASA, etc) are not credible, and gives you the brush off. So, what is the point of providing all that work when you know that their position is to deny anything contrary to party line. It is a free country, so I will get my information from what I deem the best and most reliable sources. Then if I make a statement, like in court, it is up to the opposition to do their own work to prove me wrong if they want to. Most of these posts, and many of mine, are opinions anyway. So I'll say, "yes it is", and you say, "no it isn't ".

[fdpaq0580]

It is astonishing someone still thinks CO2 is having any effect on the climate. This has been discredited by real accredited scientists who do not accept money from corporations, leftist groups, government entities, or NGOs.

Yea, right! Oh! Wait. You're being sarcastic, right? 😶😶

[fdpaq0580]

15001, if I want try to get 50000 posts knock someone off home plate, or maybe the first to 100000. Heck why not try for million. Notice I don’t don’t like anybody telling me what to do on public forum where B s rules.

I don't tell people what to do. I only make suggestions ... even if I don't word them as suggestions. 🙂🙃🙂

[Pugchief]

Glad you have such vast forum experience. Here is my experience on this forum. When asked to provide proof or give an answer or name credible sources, and having done so, the opposition simply "poopoos" says that answers is wrong, proof isn't acceptable and sources (like NOAA, UN, NATO, NASA, etc) are not credible, and gives you the brush off. So, what is the point of providing all that work when you know that their position is to deny anything contrary to party line. It is a free country, so I will get my information from what I deem the best and most reliable sources. Then if I make a statement, like in court, it is up to the opposition to do their own work to prove me wrong if they want to. Most of these posts, and many of mine, are opinions anyway. So I'll say, "yes it is", and you say, "no it isn't ".

I choose to always post links to my sources, when available, and I have had very little pushback on the credibility of my sources on TOTV. Not sure why your experience is different, but as they say, YMMV.

[biker1]

The anthropogenic increase is about 2.5 ppm per year.

So, 400 parts per million, is equal to 0.04% of our atmosphere. Plants require CO2 to produce oxygen.
While plants can utilize a range of CO2 levels, the optimal percentage for most plant life is considered to be around 0.03% or 300 parts per million (ppm), which is close to the current atmospheric concentration; however, increasing CO2 levels within a reasonable range can often boost plant growth in controlled environments like greenhouses up to around 1000 ppm.
Key points about CO2 and plant life:
Minimum level:
Plants can still photosynthesize at lower CO2 levels, but their growth will be significantly reduced.
Optimal level:
Most plants experience maximum photosynthetic activity around 300-1000 ppm CO2.
According to research, the minimum CO2 concentration considered necessary for plant life is around 150 parts per million (ppm), below which plants struggle to survive and reproduce effectively; at extremely low levels, photosynthesis would be significantly hampered and plants could die off.

So, this is me analyzing those numbers. If the plants die off below 150 parts per million, and stop producing oxygen, at what level do scientists agree we should we reduce CO2 to? How much CO2 is actually manmade compared to forest fires, volcanos, and other natural releases of CO2?

[Pugchief]

This should tell you all you need to know. Follow the money...if you can.

"Up to $41 billion of the funds distributed to climate causes by the World Bank between 2017 and 2023 are unaccounted for due to poor accounting standards, according to an audit from Oxfam International published Thursday.

The enormous sum represents almost 40% of the climate funds the Bank disbursed during the seven-year period, with World Bank data failing to show the recipients and uses of the money, the Oxfam investigation found."


And as always, here is the source of the above quote. (https://climatechangedispatch.com/breach-of-trust-oxfam-finds-nearly-41-billion-in-climate-cash-missing-from-world-bank/)

[Byte1]

Rather than Climate Change, could CO2 present a more immediate danger?

Short answer is; yes, CO2 hysteria could present "more danger"...........to the pocketbook. Global Warming and then Climate Change brought a bundle of money to some folks. But, like Global Warming, Climate Change is running out of steam so it needs to be refreshed by naming the grift "CO2 danger." This way, we can keep the financing rolling in while allowing the evolution of hysteria circle to continue by linking Global Warming, Climate Change and CO2 danger in a sort of ecological circle.

[MrFlorida]

Remember when acid rain was the big scare?

[dismay]

one way to help is ..

[biker1]

Really?


Remember when acid rain was the big scare?

[sounding]

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

Claims that burning fossil fuels create problems is not true, because there is no proof that man-made CO2 causes problems -- which will be presented Nov 21 at 1:30 PM at Laurel Manor -- during a presentation called "Sea Level Rise and Ocean Heat."

[Blueblaze]

99.9999% of the "existential catastrophes" predicted by "experts" never happened. Meanwhile, Black Death came out of nowhere and killed a third of humanity, just as it was recovering from the collapse of the Roman empire. Somebody assassinated some Duke in Serbia 100 years ago and 40 million people died -- about 10% of the population of Europe at the time. The loser of that war was punished so harshly, they came back 20 years later and another 85 million died. The Communist winners of that war went on to murder another 100 million just because they could, and then perched the world of the edge of total nuclear annihilation for the next 80 years.

Of all the things that has ever threatened mankind, CO2 levels as a side-effect of becoming wealthy beyond all our progenitor's imaginations doesn't come close to the level of threat represented by the shear stupidity of humankind -- or even the threat of China unleashing another engineered bug that doesn't merely kill old people.

The one thing that has ever solved an actual "existential threat" -- like STARVATION -- is getting wealthy and applying intelligence and technology to the problem. 8 billion souls owe their existence to the discovery of artificial fertilizers and mechanized farming. At least a billion of those also owe their life to the eradication of smallpox.

If CO2 someday actually threatens humanity, I am certain humanity can devise a solution that doesn't require 8 billion people to stop eating -- if we can somehow restrain ourselves from killing each other, just arguing about it.

[sounding]

For the latest about the climate problem, hear the new presentation called "Sea Level Rise and Ocean Heat" today (Nov 21) at 1:30 PM at Laurel Manor. Here's a 56-second preview ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLzzIFEgLxQ

[Road-Runner]

the real and present danger is the collapse in biodiversity
example: kill enough bees and pollination falls far enough where it affects fruit and vegetable production.

but no need to worry, it won't completely collapse because increased CO2 helps plants and vegetation grow faster.

The collapsing bee population will severely impact our food supply and overall health of our biosphere. We have purposely planted flowering trees and plants in our yard just trying to do our little part in this.

[sounding]

The collapsing bee population will severely impact our food supply and overall health of our biosphere. We have purposely planted flowering trees and plants in our yard just trying to do our little part in this.

As climate alarmism grows, climate realism collapses ... because data show that extinctions are decreasing as global warming and CO2 increase. Enjoy global warming while it lasts -- because the alternative is chilling.

[graciegirl]

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

I found the graph interesting that showed the shifts in CO2 over billions of years. It isn't a simple problem and I doubt a simple solution.............Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | NOAA Climate.gov (https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide#:~:text=Carbon%20dioxide%20is%20Earth%E2%8 0%99s%20most%20important)

[jimbomaybe]

Remember when acid rain was the big scare?

I can remember when that at this time the population bomb/ energy supply shortage will have us freezing, starving in the dark and yes "they" had statistics to prove it

[sounding]

We can certainly measure the increasing ocean water temperatures which has a direct impact on the severity of the storms we've been experiencing. But something that Musk highlighted during his recent conversation with a certain ex-President was the effect the rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will have on the human race.

In addition to the need to be moving to a more sustainable energy economy meaning getting away from oil and gas (demonstrating how short sighted a drill baby drill strategy is), he pointed out that as CO2 levels continue to rise we will be subjected to physiological problems like headaches and nausea and then ultimately it even becomes uncomfortable to breathe. The levels we are talking about are 1,000 PPM which based upon on the trajectory we are on will be by the end of this century (the actual trajectory since 1960 has been a straight line upwards thanks to industry and our addiction to fossil fuels - Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/) and Scripps CO2 Program (https://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/)).

So rather than climate change and the warming of our planet, maybe we should be thinking about the problems associated with elevated CO2 levels including our ability to breathe. Based upon that, burning more fossil fuels will only exacerbate that problem. That's at least one thing that I think Musk is getting right.

Food for thought. Makes me want to buy an EV or at least a hybrid next time I buy a car.

We are actually in a CO2 famine. More is better. Find out why at the next Weather Club meeting ... The Villages Weather Club (https://www.theweatherclubvillages.com/)