Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) (sci.geo.meteorology) For the discussion of meteorology and related topics. |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() The whole article is a big question mark, we're not sure even if there is a reduction in CO2 absorption and further we don't know what's causing it. Roger wrote: "Of the new carbon released to the atmosphere from fossil fuel combustion and deforestation, some remains in the atmosphere, while some is taken up into the land biosphere (in places other than those which are being cut)" But in the other places only the some percent of CO2 can be taken up into the land biosphere. This part which have the natural proportion with SO2 and fly ash. If we reduce SO2 (desulphurisation) and fly ash (electrofilters) the reduction in CO2 absorption is the natural consequence. S* |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Climate Change Quickens. Oceans are absorbing less carbon dioxide | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
A Simple Example Debunks Positive Feedback In CO2 Warming | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
A Simple Example Debunks Positive Feedback In CO2 Warming | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Yet another positive feedback for global warming. | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Even Bacteria are a Positive GW Feedback!!! | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) |