Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
6874 messages, Last post on Nov 30, 2009 at 2:04 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: kernick (Oct 28, 2008 12:50 pm) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_(geology) and "Radioactive potassium, uranium and thorium are thought to be the three main sources of heat in the Earth's interior, aside from that generated by the formation of the planet. Together, the heat keeps the mantle actively churning and the core generating a protective magnetic field." ..."Gradually, however, the Earth would have cooled off and become a dead rocky globe with a cold iron ball at the core if not for the continued release of heat by the decay of radioactive elements like potassium-40, uranium-238 and thorium-232, which have half-lives of 1.25 billion, 4 billion and 14 billion years, respectively. "http://www.physlink.com/News/121103PotassiumCore.cfm " The Sun is the original source of all energy that has, is and will be used on Earth." Nope.  Geothermal energy is energy from the earth not the sun. The sun is responsible for the surface heat on the earth. http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/1998-10/905866177.Es.r.html
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Oct 28, 2008 5:27 am) Climate refers to the temperature, humidity, rainfall, atmospheric particle count and numerous other meteorological factors in a region over long periods of time, as opposed to the term weather, which refers to current activity. Focus people, focus..... 
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 29, 2008 5:18 pm) The article does not particularly state it - but the "given" is the physical environment now - which is thwe Sun keeps the outer surface 500F hotter then it otherwise would be. This is the differenc ebetween storing something in the oven at 500F or your freezer. Now if you're saying this makes no difference, then I'll ask you where you took your thermodynamics. Without the Sun the Earth freezes solid. Very little of the Earth's elements are radioactive. Iron will freeze solid. Energy is not created from nothingness. The Sun is responsible for all gravitational energy, motion, and surface warming, which allows the core to stay molten. It is the formation of the Sun that created the gravity that then allowed further dust to accumulate and form the planets. Thus the Sun is the source of the Earth and any geothermal energy. The Sun will also end all life on Earth in about 1 billion when it expands (Red Giant Stage) and it gets hot enough to boil away the oceans. That's about the time our Milky Way (galaxy, not candy) will be meeting up with the Andromeda Galaxy - could be a fun time - maybe we'll get caught in a second star's gravity and be a binary system? That was and is, how much a factor the Sun is.  A great sun song - "Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 29, 2008 5:32 pm) When you are freezing your fanny off, you don't care. Get in your SUV and start reving.
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 29, 2008 4:56 pm) I would imagine some of the research was paid for as a result of government arm twisting. You can apply to companies like BP for research grants. It most likely is in their best interest. No other good reason for them to spend the money. I would not expect any company to pay for research without potential gain. The government is the only entity that throws money away on worthless research. The last spending bill is loaded with those kind of wasted earmarks. You being a scientist would not consider spending on most things as frivolous. As a tax payer I find the following pork unacceptable. Representative Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) for $211,509 in olive fruit fly research in Paris, France. Hope he and his family had a wonderful vacation 
|
|
|
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Oct 30, 2008 6:29 am) Yep, my climate is too cold also. I have no need for an AC, but heat my house for up to 9 months a year. This type of condition goes on year after year. There's vast stretches of land in Canada, Asia, and Alaska which could become habitable if it warmed a little, and most of the rest of us could enjoy a little added warmth each day. That's why everyone moves south and west when they retire because the vast majority of people prefer the warmer weather. When I retire, I'm either moving to Hawaii, or maybe Costa Rica if the cost and politicics is right then. |
|
|
MIT scientists baffled by global warming theory, contradicts scientific data Boston (MA) - Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature - and not the direct result of man's contributions. There goes Big Al's Carbon Credit Bonanza http://www.tgdaily.com/html_tmp/content-view-39973-113-text.html
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 30, 2008 2:51 pm) More study Prinn has said, "The next step will be to study [these changes] using a very high-resolution atmospheric circulation model and additional measurements from other networks. The key thing is to better determine the relative roles of increased methane emission versus [an increase] in the rate of removal. Apparently we have a mix of the two, but we want to know how much of each [is responsible for the overall increase]." The primary concern now is that 2007 is long over. While the collected data from that time period reflects a simultaneous world-wide increase in emissions, observing atmospheric trends now is like observing the healthy horse running through the paddock a year after it overcame some mystery illness. Where does one even begin? And how relevant are any of the data findings at this late date? Looking back over 2007 data as it was captured may prove as ineffective if the data does not support the high resolution details such a study requires. All that says is that we still know nothing about the root causes of the warming we have observed. Which we already knew. Which other people have already said before. YAWN
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Oct 30, 2008 3:00 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Oct 30, 2008 3:00 pm) 
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
