CO2 and Deforestation: Back of the envelope calculation.

Back of the envelope cutting TREES and CO2
===
http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/gl.../deforest.html
40 million acres per year. Trees destroyed each YEAR!

CO2 stored per acre per year: 3.67 metric tons CO2 .

Calculation of CO2 in atmosphere.

http://micpohling.wordpress.com/2007...he-atmosphere/

1750-1960 Produced 1190 million tons CO2 per year into atmosphere.

From 1960 to 2007 produced 12,127 million tons per year.

For drill we will assume that trees are on average 50 years old and all
CO2 stored in trees ends up being freed by burning, decay etc.

40 x 3.67 x 50 = 7140 million tons of CO2 EACH YEAR produced by Forest
destruction!

Note that this is 60% of the CO2 increase that is being claimed as ONLY
due to fossil fuels.

And there is one more thing: The trees cut down are no longer sucking up
CO2 so their YEARLY UPTAKE must be ADDED to the total which is another
150 million tons per year.

The point of this exercise is not to produce an exact theory of CO2 and
deforestation but simply to do a quick calculation to show that
deforestation is likely a MAJOR cause if not THE major cause of the
alarming, dramatic and accelerating CO2 levels in the atmosphere that is
being attributed to fossil fuel use.

I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming”!

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 14:07:28 -0400, bjacoby
wrote:


I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming”!

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal.../410355a0.html

Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing
longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997

John E. Harries, Helen E. Brindley, Pretty J. Sagoo & Richard J.
Bantges

Space and Atmospheric Physics Group, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial
College, London SW7 2BW, UK

Correspondence to: John E. Harries. Correspondence and requests
for materials should be addressed to J.E.H. (e-mail: Email:
).

The evolution of the Earth's climate has been extensively studied
(1, 2), and a strong link between increases in surface
temperatures and greenhouse gases has been established (3, 4). But
this relationship is complicated by several feedback processes---
most importantly the hydrological cycle--- that are not well
understood (5, 6, 7). Changes in the Earth's greenhouse effect can
be detected from variations in the spectrum of outgoing longwave
radiation (8, 9, 10), which is a measure of how the Earth cools to
space and carries the imprint of the gases that are responsible
for the greenhouse effect (11, 12, 13). Here we analyse the
difference between the spectra of the outgoing longwave radiation
of the Earth as measured by orbiting spacecraft in 1970 and 1997.
We find differences in the spectra that point to long-term changes
in atmospheric CH4, CO2 and O3 as well as CFC-11 and CFC-12. Our
results provide direct experimental evidence for a significant
increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect that is consistent with
concerns over radiative forcing of climate.

Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview_2006.html

Stable isotope ratio mass spectrometry in global climate change
research
http://www.bgc.mpg.de/service/iso_ga...PG_WB_IJMS.pdf

Global oceanic and land biotic carbon sinks
http://bluemoon.ucsd.edu/publication...eeling2006.pdf

Measurements of the Radiative Surface Forcing of Climate
http://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2006...per_100737.htm

How do we know more CO2 is causing warming?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...use-effect.htm

Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re...1-chapter2.pdf

NOAA: Past Decade Warmest on Record According to Scientists in 48
Countries; Earth has been growing warmer for more than fifty years
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories...heclimate.html

Scientific Evidence - Increasing Temperatures & Greenhouse Gases
http://www.whrc.org/resources/primer_fundamentals.html

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

"Attribution of the present-day total greenhouse effect"
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/...idt_etal_1.pdf

"Infrared radiation and planetary temperature"
http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc...s_1/33_1.shtml
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/pap...odayRT2011.pdf

"Te - the surface temperature of the earth if there were no
atmosphere, is known as the effective emission temperature. It is
determined solely by the insolation and the planetary albedo. On
Earth, Te is much colder than the observed global-mean surface
temperature of 15C or 288 K. The difference must be due to the
atmosphere. The warming effect of the atmosphere, known as the
greenhouse effect, is best understood as follows. The atmosphere
is opaque in the infrared, which means that the mean emission
level is lifted off the ground. The mean temperature at the
emission level (i.e. the mean brightness temperature) must be Te
in order for emission to match absorbed insolation. But the
atmosphere has a positive lapse rate, and so the temperature at
the ground must be greater than Te." Wow!

Taken from the excellent free lecture notes on Physical
Meteorology, Page 132.
http://mathsci.ucd.ie/met/msc/PhysMe...tLectNotes.pdf

The History of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide on Earth
http://www.planetforlife.com/co2history/index.html

"Proof of the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect:"
http://arxiv.org/abs/0802.4324

Infrared Radiation and Planetary Temperature
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/pap...odayRT2011.pdf

Attribution of the present-day total greenhouse effect
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/...idt_etal_1.pdf

Scientific Evidence - Increasing Temperatures & Greenhouse Gases
http://www.whrc.org/resources/primer_fundamentals.html

Actual Calculations: The Physical Chemistry of Climate Change
(Fritz Franzen)
http://edu-observatory.org/Franzen/index.html

The radiative forcings give a decent picture of why the earth is
globally warming. As you can see there are many contributors to
the radiative forcing, with human generated CO2 leading the way.

http://edu-observatory.org/olli/IPCC_SPM.2.png

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rcings.svg.png



--
REALITY NEEDS ALLIES!
"RESPECT ARE - COUNTRY SPEAK ENGLISH" --- sign at a "tea party" rally

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 16:32:10 -0600, Desertphile
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 14:07:28 -0400, bjacoby
wrote:


I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming”!

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal.../410355a0.html

Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing
longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997

John E. Harries, Helen E. Brindley, Pretty J. Sagoo & Richard J.
Bantges

Space and Atmospheric Physics Group, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial
College, London SW7 2BW, UK

Correspondence to: John E. Harries. Correspondence and requests
for materials should be addressed to J.E.H. (e-mail: Email:
).

The evolution of the Earth's climate has been extensively studied
(1, 2), and a strong link between increases in surface
temperatures and greenhouse gases has been established (3, 4). But
this relationship is complicated by several feedback processes---
most importantly the hydrological cycle--- that are not well
understood (5, 6, 7). Changes in the Earth's greenhouse effect can
be detected from variations in the spectrum of outgoing longwave
radiation (8, 9, 10), which is a measure of how the Earth cools to
space and carries the imprint of the gases that are responsible
for the greenhouse effect (11, 12, 13). Here we analyse the
difference between the spectra of the outgoing longwave radiation
of the Earth as measured by orbiting spacecraft in 1970 and 1997.
We find differences in the spectra that point to long-term changes
in atmospheric CH4, CO2 and O3 as well as CFC-11 and CFC-12. Our
results provide direct experimental evidence for a significant
increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect that is consistent with
concerns over radiative forcing of climate.

Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview_2006.html

Stable isotope ratio mass spectrometry in global climate change
research
http://www.bgc.mpg.de/service/iso_ga...PG_WB_IJMS.pdf

Global oceanic and land biotic carbon sinks
http://bluemoon.ucsd.edu/publication...eeling2006.pdf

Measurements of the Radiative Surface Forcing of Climate
http://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2006...per_100737.htm

How do we know more CO2 is causing warming?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...use-effect.htm

Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re...1-chapter2.pdf

NOAA: Past Decade Warmest on Record According to Scientists in 48
Countries; Earth has been growing warmer for more than fifty years
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories...heclimate.html

Scientific Evidence - Increasing Temperatures & Greenhouse Gases
http://www.whrc.org/resources/primer_fundamentals.html

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

"Attribution of the present-day total greenhouse effect"
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/...idt_etal_1.pdf

"Infrared radiation and planetary temperature"
http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc...s_1/33_1.shtml
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/pap...odayRT2011.pdf

"Te - the surface temperature of the earth if there were no
atmosphere, is known as the effective emission temperature. It is
determined solely by the insolation and the planetary albedo. On
Earth, Te is much colder than the observed global-mean surface
temperature of 15C or 288 K. The difference must be due to the
atmosphere. The warming effect of the atmosphere, known as the
greenhouse effect, is best understood as follows. The atmosphere
is opaque in the infrared, which means that the mean emission
level is lifted off the ground. The mean temperature at the
emission level (i.e. the mean brightness temperature) must be Te
in order for emission to match absorbed insolation. But the
atmosphere has a positive lapse rate, and so the temperature at
the ground must be greater than Te." Wow!

Taken from the excellent free lecture notes on Physical
Meteorology, Page 132.
http://mathsci.ucd.ie/met/msc/PhysMe...tLectNotes.pdf

The History of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide on Earth
http://www.planetforlife.com/co2history/index.html

"Proof of the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect:"
http://arxiv.org/abs/0802.4324

Infrared Radiation and Planetary Temperature
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/pap...odayRT2011.pdf

Attribution of the present-day total greenhouse effect
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/...idt_etal_1.pdf

Scientific Evidence - Increasing Temperatures & Greenhouse Gases
http://www.whrc.org/resources/primer_fundamentals.html

Actual Calculations: The Physical Chemistry of Climate Change
(Fritz Franzen)
http://edu-observatory.org/Franzen/index.html

The radiative forcings give a decent picture of why the earth is
globally warming. As you can see there are many contributors to
the radiative forcing, with human generated CO2 leading the way.

http://edu-observatory.org/olli/IPCC_SPM.2.png

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rcings.svg.png

Not even a "thank you" from the alarmist.


--
"RESPECT ARE - COUNTRY SPEAK ENGLISH" --- sign at a "tea party" rally

On Jul 4, 11:07*am, bjacoby wrote:
Back of the envelope cutting TREES and CO2
===http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/defo...
40 million acres per year. Trees destroyed each YEAR!

CO2 stored per acre per year: 3.67 metric tons CO2 .

Calculation of CO2 in atmosphere.

http://micpohling.wordpress.com/2007...h-co2-by-weigh...

1750-1960 *Produced *1190 million tons CO2 per year into atmosphere.

*From 1960 to 2007 produced 12,127 million tons per year.

For drill we will assume that trees are on average 50 years old and all
CO2 stored in trees ends up being freed by burning, decay etc.

40 x 3.67 x 50 = *7140 million tons of CO2 EACH YEAR produced by Forest
destruction!

Note that this is 60% of the CO2 increase that is being claimed as ONLY
due to fossil fuels.

And there is one more thing: The trees cut down are no longer sucking up
CO2 so their YEARLY UPTAKE must be ADDED to the total which is another
150 million tons per year.

The point of this exercise is not to produce an exact theory of CO2 and
deforestation but simply to do a quick calculation to show that
deforestation is likely a MAJOR cause if not THE major cause of the
alarming, dramatic and accelerating CO2 levels in the atmosphere that is
being attributed to fossil fuel use.

I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming”!

Which fossil fuels (aka hydrocarbons) do not consume atmosphere?

Which hydrocarbons w/atmosphere are not negative energy?

Assuming Earth was chemically and thermal-dynamically balanced before
modern humans ever came along, and if we modern humans contribute 70
TW/hr, where's the problem in figuring out this GW/AGW thing?

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 15:42:16 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
wrote:

On Jul 4, 11:07*am, bjacoby wrote:

Back of the envelope cutting TREES and CO2
===http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/defo...
40 million acres per year. Trees destroyed each YEAR!

CO2 stored per acre per year: 3.67 metric tons CO2 .

Calculation of CO2 in atmosphere.

http://micpohling.wordpress.com/2007...h-co2-by-weigh...

1750-1960 *Produced *1190 million tons CO2 per year into atmosphere.

*From 1960 to 2007 produced 12,127 million tons per year.

For drill we will assume that trees are on average 50 years old and all
CO2 stored in trees ends up being freed by burning, decay etc.

40 x 3.67 x 50 = *7140 million tons of CO2 EACH YEAR produced by Forest
destruction!

Note that this is 60% of the CO2 increase that is being claimed as ONLY
due to fossil fuels.

And there is one more thing: The trees cut down are no longer sucking up
CO2 so their YEARLY UPTAKE must be ADDED to the total which is another
150 million tons per year.

The point of this exercise is not to produce an exact theory of CO2 and
deforestation but simply to do a quick calculation to show that
deforestation is likely a MAJOR cause if not THE major cause of the
alarming, dramatic and accelerating CO2 levels in the atmosphere that is
being attributed to fossil fuel use.

I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming”!

Which fossil fuels (aka hydrocarbons) do not consume atmosphere?

Which hydrocarbons w/atmosphere are not negative energy?

Assuming Earth was chemically and thermal-dynamically balanced before
modern humans ever came along, and if we modern humans contribute 70
TW/hr, where's the problem in figuring out this GW/AGW thing?

It isn't a problem of figuring out the effects: it's a problem of
rejecting the facts and evidence.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


--
"RESPECT ARE - COUNTRY SPEAK ENGLISH" --- sign at a "tea party" rally

On Jul 5, 7:56*am, Desertphile wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 15:42:16 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth









wrote:
On Jul 4, 11:07*am, bjacoby wrote:
Back of the envelope cutting TREES and CO2
===http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/defo...
40 million acres per year. Trees destroyed each YEAR!

CO2 stored per acre per year: 3.67 metric tons CO2 .

Calculation of CO2 in atmosphere.

http://micpohling.wordpress.com/2007...h-co2-by-weigh....

1750-1960 *Produced *1190 million tons CO2 per year into atmosphere.

*From 1960 to 2007 produced 12,127 million tons per year.

For drill we will assume that trees are on average 50 years old and all
CO2 stored in trees ends up being freed by burning, decay etc.

40 x 3.67 x 50 = *7140 million tons of CO2 EACH YEAR produced by Forest
destruction!

Note that this is 60% of the CO2 increase that is being claimed as ONLY
due to fossil fuels.

And there is one more thing: The trees cut down are no longer sucking up
CO2 so their YEARLY UPTAKE must be ADDED to the total which is another
150 million tons per year.

The point of this exercise is not to produce an exact theory of CO2 and
deforestation but simply to do a quick calculation to show that
deforestation is likely a MAJOR cause if not THE major cause of the
alarming, dramatic and accelerating CO2 levels in the atmosphere that is
being attributed to fossil fuel use.

I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming”!

Which fossil fuels (aka hydrocarbons) do not consume atmosphere?

Which hydrocarbons w/atmosphere are not negative energy?

Assuming Earth was chemically and thermal-dynamically balanced before
modern humans ever came along, and if we modern humans contribute 70
TW/hr, where's the problem in figuring out this GW/AGW thing?

It isn't a problem of figuring out the effects: it's a problem of
rejecting the facts and evidence.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

--
"RESPECT ARE - COUNTRY SPEAK ENGLISH" --- sign at a "tea party" rally

I must continually reject those unwilling to interpret the best
available science. It's called mainstream obfuscation, and those
opposed to any GW/AGW that's human caused are always good at
obfuscating their butts off.

The all-inclusive affects of humans isn't insignificant.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 15:54:33 -0700, Brad Guth wrote:

On Jul 5, 7:56Â*am, Desertphile wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 15:42:16 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth









wrote:
On Jul 4, 11:07Â*am, bjacoby wrote:
Back of the envelope cutting TREES and CO2
===http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/
lectures/defo...
40 million acres per year. Trees destroyed each YEAR!

CO2 stored per acre per year: 3.67 metric tons CO2 .

Calculation of CO2 in atmosphere.

http://micpohling.wordpress.com/2007...w-much-co2-by-
weigh...

1750-1960 Â*Produced Â*1190 million tons CO2 per year into
atmosphere.

Â*From 1960 to 2007 produced 12,127 million tons per year.

For drill we will assume that trees are on average 50 years old and
all CO2 stored in trees ends up being freed by burning, decay etc.

40 x 3.67 x 50 = Â*7140 million tons of CO2 EACH YEAR produced by
Forest destruction!

Note that this is 60% of the CO2 increase that is being claimed as
ONLY due to fossil fuels.

And there is one more thing: The trees cut down are no longer
sucking up CO2 so their YEARLY UPTAKE must be ADDED to the total
which is another 150 million tons per year.

The point of this exercise is not to produce an exact theory of CO2
and deforestation but simply to do a quick calculation to show that
deforestation is likely a MAJOR cause if not THE major cause of the
alarming, dramatic and accelerating CO2 levels in the atmosphere
that is being attributed to fossil fuel use.

I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming�!

Which fossil fuels (aka hydrocarbons) do not consume atmosphere?

Which hydrocarbons w/atmosphere are not negative energy?

Assuming Earth was chemically and thermal-dynamically balanced before
modern humans ever came along, and if we modern humans contribute 70
TW/hr, where's the problem in figuring out this GW/AGW thing?

It isn't a problem of figuring out the effects: it's a problem of
rejecting the facts and evidence.

Â*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
Â*http://translate.google.com/#
Â*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/â€�Guth Venusâ€�

--
"RESPECT ARE - COUNTRY SPEAK ENGLISH" --- sign at a "tea party" rally

I must continually reject those unwilling to interpret the best
available science. It's called mainstream obfuscation, and those
opposed to any GW/AGW that's human caused are always good at obfuscating
their butts off.

The all-inclusive affects of humans isn't insignificant.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/�Guth Venus�

Wait... aren't you the guy who wants to dig tunnels on the moon and don't
believe in special relativity?

On Jul 5, 6:06*pm, Marvin the Martian wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 15:54:33 -0700, Brad Guth wrote:
On Jul 5, 7:56*am, Desertphile wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2012 15:42:16 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth

wrote:
On Jul 4, 11:07*am, bjacoby wrote:
Back of the envelope cutting TREES and CO2
===http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/
lectures/defo...
40 million acres per year. Trees destroyed each YEAR!

CO2 stored per acre per year: 3.67 metric tons CO2 .

Calculation of CO2 in atmosphere.

http://micpohling.wordpress.com/2007...w-much-co2-by-
weigh...

1750-1960 *Produced *1190 million tons CO2 per year into
atmosphere.

*From 1960 to 2007 produced 12,127 million tons per year.

For drill we will assume that trees are on average 50 years old and
all CO2 stored in trees ends up being freed by burning, decay etc.

40 x 3.67 x 50 = *7140 million tons of CO2 EACH YEAR produced by
Forest destruction!

Note that this is 60% of the CO2 increase that is being claimed as
ONLY due to fossil fuels.

And there is one more thing: The trees cut down are no longer
sucking up CO2 so their YEARLY UPTAKE must be ADDED to the total
which is another 150 million tons per year.

The point of this exercise is not to produce an exact theory of CO2
and deforestation but simply to do a quick calculation to show that
deforestation is likely a MAJOR cause if not THE major cause of the
alarming, dramatic and accelerating CO2 levels in the atmosphere
that is being attributed to fossil fuel use.

I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming”!

Which fossil fuels (aka hydrocarbons) do not consume atmosphere?

Which hydrocarbons w/atmosphere are not negative energy?

Assuming Earth was chemically and thermal-dynamically balanced before
modern humans ever came along, and if we modern humans contribute 70
TW/hr, where's the problem in figuring out this GW/AGW thing?

It isn't a problem of figuring out the effects: it's a problem of
rejecting the facts and evidence.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

--
"RESPECT ARE - COUNTRY SPEAK ENGLISH" --- sign at a "tea party" rally

I must continually reject those unwilling to interpret the best
available science. *It's called mainstream obfuscation, and those
opposed to any GW/AGW that's human caused are always good at obfuscating
their butts off.

The all-inclusive affects of humans isn't insignificant.

*http://groups.google.com/groups/sear...e.google.com/#
*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

Wait... aren't you the guy who wants to dig tunnels on the moon and don't
believe in special relativity?

What do you have against TBMs excavating into our moon?

Relativity is a theory that can be replaced by other laws of physics.

Photons are also nonzero mass, at least half of their 2D time, and
dark/transparent matter does seen to exist or rather coexist.

Something weird is still going on with Venus.

“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...79402364691314

Other thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html
Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/ht...115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

On Jul 4, 7:07*pm, bjacoby wrote:
Back of the envelope cutting TREES and CO2
===http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/defo...
40 million acres per year. Trees destroyed each YEAR!

CO2 stored per acre per year: 3.67 metric tons CO2 .

Calculation of CO2 in atmosphere.

http://micpohling.wordpress.com/2007...h-co2-by-weigh...

1750-1960 *Produced *1190 million tons CO2 per year into atmosphere.

*From 1960 to 2007 produced 12,127 million tons per year.

For drill we will assume that trees are on average 50 years old and all
CO2 stored in trees ends up being freed by burning, decay etc.

40 x 3.67 x 50 = *7140 million tons of CO2 EACH YEAR produced by Forest
destruction!

Note that this is 60% of the CO2 increase that is being claimed as ONLY
due to fossil fuels.

And there is one more thing: The trees cut down are no longer sucking up
CO2 so their YEARLY UPTAKE must be ADDED to the total which is another
150 million tons per year.

The point of this exercise is not to produce an exact theory of CO2 and
deforestation but simply to do a quick calculation to show that
deforestation is likely a MAJOR cause if not THE major cause of the
alarming, dramatic and accelerating CO2 levels in the atmosphere that is
being attributed to fossil fuel use.

I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause “global warming”!

Every now and then, some nutbar comes on here and says this.

Read this, will you? CO2 most certainly does cause warming. You are
simply ignorant of the fact and the physics - like others of your ilk:

http://www.jcsda.noaa.gov/documents/...fraRadTran.pdf

Now come back on and tell us that CO2 does not cause global warming.
You won't, because you can't justify your idiot assertion. You'll
probably have a go at me instead for showing you up as a nutbar again.
*))

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 05:43:12 -0700 (PDT), Dawlish
wrote:

On Jul 4, 7:07*pm, bjacoby wrote:

I’d say we are damn lucky CO2 does NOT cause global warming!

In the same sense that we're damn lucking there's no such things
as death and taxes.

Every now and then, some nutbar comes on here and says this.

Read this, will you? CO2 most certainly does cause warming. You are
simply ignorant of the fact and the physics - like others of your ilk:

http://www.jcsda.noaa.gov/documents/...fraRadTran.pdf

Now come back on and tell us that CO2 does not cause global warming.
You won't, because you can't justify your idiot assertion. You'll
probably have a go at me instead for showing you up as a nutbar again.
*))

The cultist will ignore the facts, the evidence, and the laws of
physics. He has a political ideology to further....


--
"RESPECT ARE - COUNTRY SPEAK ENGLISH" --- sign at a "tea party" rally