How Does America's Response to Climate Change Look From Abroad? | NYT Opinion

[freebeard]

Isn't it odd that random chance always ratchets in one direction?

[Piotrsko]

Remember Murphy was subject to Murphy's Law.

[oil pan 4]

Yeah that would be the solar flare kill shot that makes global warming the least of our problems.

[freebeard]

I've always expected runaway greenhouse punctuated by an asteroidal winter.

But then, I didn't know about secondary axis rotation and the Mantle plumes. Atlantis didn't wind up under the ocean, it's 12,000 feet in the air and scoured to bedrock. Randall Carlson said so.

[basjoos]

The prehistoric CO2 low during the past ice Age was 180 ppm. This is only 30 ppm above the CO2 level (150 ppm) where C3 plants, which make up 95% of all plant species and 100% of all marine plants, are unable to grow. So during the past ice Age we can very close to a total collapse of all ecosystems that are dependent upon C3 plants. The overall long term trend with CO2 levels has been downward, starting at 7000 ppm during the Cambrian era as a portion of the carbon captured by plants doesn’t get recycled back into the atmosphere, but instead is permanently stored in the ground in the form of limestone, coal, and oil. In the absence of human activity, it is likely that during the next ice Age, CO2 levels would drop below the 150 ppm that would result in the death of all C3 plants and the animals that depend on them. So, looking in the long term, human releases of CO2 into the atmosphere is a good thing for the long term health of the biosphere, putting off the day when the earth’s atmosphere no longer holds enough CO2 to support photosynthesis.

[redpoint5]

That analysis sounds right to me, but I'd add that releasing CO2 rapidly (from a geological perspective) puts undue strain on organisms to adapt. The ideal rate of release would be the topic of debate.

[basjoos]

As a means of raising atmospheric CO2, the way that nature accomplishes it (flood volcanism with hundreds of square miles inundated under lava such as created the Siberian and Deccan traps) is a much harder on the environment than humans burning oil and coal. When the Siberian traps were created during the Permian era, it raised atmospheric CO2 from 400 ppm to 1800 ppm, 90% of life went extinct from volcanic ash falls, acid rains, “nuclear“ winter cold and darkness. But flood volcanism events are becoming less common than in the past as the earth’s interior gradually cools.

[oil pan 4]

The ideal rate of CO2 release, don't use fossil fuels to cover power grid bade load. That would be a really good starting point.
Save the coal and natural gas for making steel, concrete, glass, fiberglass, aluminum, asphalt, ect.

Originally Posted by basjoos

The prehistoric CO2 low during the past ice Age was 180 ppm. This is only 30 ppm above the CO2 level (150 ppm) where C3 plants, which make up 95% of all plant species and 100% of all marine plants, are unable to grow. So during the past ice Age we can very close to a total collapse of all ecosystems that are dependent upon C3 plants. The overall long term trend with CO2 levels has been downward, starting at 7000 ppm during the Cambrian era as a portion of the carbon captured by plants doesn’t get recycled back into the atmosphere, but instead is permanently stored in the ground in the form of limestone, coal, and oil. In the absence of human activity, it is likely that during the next ice Age, CO2 levels would drop below the 150 ppm that would result in the death of all C3 plants and the animals that depend on them. So, looking in the long term, human releases of CO2 into the atmosphere is a good thing for the long term health of the biosphere, putting off the day when the earth’s atmosphere no longer holds enough CO2 to support photosynthesis.

Couldn't have said it bettery self.
The further away from 150 ppm the better, to a point. That point is debatable.

[freebeard]

That wonderful person, Anton Petrov put his up on the 25th:

12000 Years of Human History Show Surprise Effects on Nature

Long story short, humankind was a net positive for biodiversity, right up until 200 years ago. But if you catch the chart most of the impact is in India and China. Where all the people are.

[oil pan 4]

You don't say..