[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by CODYCAT

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]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

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

Top 25 Cities with Worst Air Pollution (2023 Rankings) – Smart Air

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

"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

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

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

[EddieUA]

Originally Posted by 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 and Scripps CO2 Program).

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

[Laraine]

Originally Posted by skarra

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]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

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.

Originally Posted by Laraine

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.

Originally Posted by 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 and Scripps CO2 Program).

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

The Earth is warming and increased CO2 and methane are the problem.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by skarra

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]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

Top 25 Cities with Worst Air Pollution (2023 Rankings) – Smart Air

Yep, but the subject was countries.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.