Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese
I actually thought it was about 0.03% per volume. I don't suppose that matters too much. Still pretty insignificant per volume and not a convincing percentage increase.
Yeah that sort of illustrates my point really. I have to say we have lots of them here. There are wind farms every where on the coast line and some a little further inland. I like the idea of them but the environmental damage they cause just to make them is well counter productive to the whole use of them. I actually thought California had more wind farms than anywhere else on the planet but I stand corrected.
One thing is for certain though, if climate change is being accelerated by us and the dire warnings are as bad as they say will occur; then we best get on with building nuclear plants because 3 accidents is going to be nothing compared to world wide devastation.
|
Can you please tell us all why you think.
human introduced Carbon Dioxide 110 ppm = no effect.
Ozone @ 0.7 ppm = big and very important effect.
Can you please explain why you anti-science people can down play carbons effects yet without a far less common gass we wouldn't be here?