Well done, Steve. Very good analogy. Water vapor is a significant carrier of many kinds of air pollution, in addition to just making it hard to breathe on its own.
The whole idea of lumping CO2 in with floro-compounds is absurd imho- those have significant toxicity all by themselves; and then ignore ozone, which has significant effects, well, I am not sure what they were thinking. I don't follow the logic. CO2 is an essential component of air- life requires it in some amount. If they focus on that instead of things that are actually toxic, then not too much has to change, maybe- whereas if they focus on fcs and pfcs etc then industry has to make changes, which we all know costs money. Not good for businesses. Thanks for the link. Kathryn On Dec 9, 2009, at 7:29 PM, Steve wrote: > CO2 is not a pollutant. Without CO2 in the air, plants would die. It's a > natural component of our ecosphere. Animals breathe in oxygen and breathe > out CO2. Plants breathe in CO2 and breathe out oxygen. > > Of course, Nixon's EPA has declared CO2 to be a 'pollutant.' Kind of. > It's mostly crazy double-speak, in my opinion. Here's a link to what > appears to be an unbiased article on the topic - > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124001537515830975.html > > To put things in perspective, Nitrogen makes up 78% of our atmosphere. > Oxygen makes up 21%. Argon is 0.93%, then CO2 comes along at 4th place at > 0.038%. The remaining 0.032% is divided up between a bunch of other gases > not worth mentioning for this discussion. > > I find it hard to put these kind of percentages in perspective so I'll > compare this to a football field. 100 yards, 300 feet, or 14,400 inches, > however you want to look at it. > > So, between nitrogen and oxygen, we use up the first 99 yards of the football > field. That leaves 1 yard, or 3 feet. Argon takes up 2.79 feet which > leaves us with .21 feet or 2.52 inches. > > So, CO2 takes up a little more than 1 1/3 inches out of the whole football > field. So, the man-made climate change theorists are trying to panic us > because CO2 has gone up by > > Of course, this is only the 'dry' atmosphere. Water vapor is, like CO2, > considered to be a greenhouse gas, because it tends to hold warmth in and > prevents it from escaping to outer space. Depending on the area, time of > day and season, the atmosphere can range between 1% and 5% of water vapor. > > So, the EPA picks on CO2 but not water vapor even though they both have the > same impact. I'm thinking water vapor has a MUCH larger impact than CO2 > because on that old football field it would take up anywhere from 36 inches > to 180 inches compared to CO2's lousy 1 1/3 inches. > > > --- On Wed, 12/9/09, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: CS>No wonder there's an explosion of: > To: [email protected] > Cc: "Annie B Smythe" <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 6:02 PM > > Don't worry, at least they're focu$ing on the most deadly pollutant of > all...CO2. > > > ---- Annie B Smythe <[email protected]> wrote: > > =
