Carbon Dioxide Emissions Help Tropical Rain Forests Grow Faster

[criptix]

Methane and Water Vapor are way, way, way more effective greenhouse gasses than CO2, but for whatever reaon CO2 gets all the bad press.  Meanwhile, the world's forests grows as measure by sattelite far outpace the predictions of the past century due to increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

http://www.co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/forests.php

There's a lot more to atmospheric science than what 99% of the public understand and what is reported on main stream media outlets.

But I suspect the tropical forests will soon all die, due to water shortages.  This sort of thing can't continue for long -

http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-majority-of-earths-potable-water-trapped-in,38356/

wait what?
scientist try to get fresh water out of coke products??
how does the fresh water come into the coke products in the first place?
just stop drinking sugar+acid water you idiots

/edit

so coca cola company needs in average 2,16 liter fresh water to produce 1 liter cola products. (2014)
using cola products will kill humanity and nature in the long run - think about it every time you drink a coke.

oh wait, i forgot that coca cola products are one of the unhealthiest products on our planet. probaly as problematic as radioactive material.

https://www.worldwildlife.org/projects/wwf-coca-cola-s-work-to-conserve-fresh-water

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/03/02/coca-cola-and-nestle-are-sucking-us-dry-without-us.aspx

Human beings need five liters a day for hydration and 25 liters a day for minimum hygiene. That accounts for a whopping 1.5% of freshwater extraction for human purposes. Unconventional fuel-source extraction and ever-thirstier agriculture account for a wildly disproportionate share of the rest. The thinking goes that if there were a value placed on that remaining 98.5% of the water we use, we might use it in a more appropriate manner.

where is the the other 98,5% fresh water? over 2/3 of it is in cola and nestle products.

The companies' conflicts with communities in Latin America, Asia, and Africa are too numerous and sordid to be invented from whole cloth. Moreover, the simple fact is that sucking groundwater out of one place, bottling it, and shipping it for sale in another place that typically already has perfectly safe public water ranks high on the list of stupid things to do with scarce water.

So yes, Coca-Cola and Nestle are indeed sucking us dry. So are our modern agricultural practices and unconventional oil and gas extraction, to an even greater extent. A blended privatization scheme may indeed be part of the solution, but if it's done right, it will only make life harder for Coke and Nestle.

http://www.indiaresource.org/campaigns/coke/2006/cokewwf.html

The Coca-Cola company proudly boasts that it has a water use ratio of 2.7 to 1. That is, for every 2.7 liters of water (freshwater) it takes from the earth, it produces 1 liter of product. What happens to the remaining 1.7 liters (or 63%) of the water? It is used to clean bottles and machinery, and is discarded as wastewater.
[...]
Coca-Cola's water use ratio in India is 4 to 1 - that is, 75% of the freshwater it extracts is turned into wastewater. The company has indiscriminately discharged its wastewater into the surrounding fields, severely polluting the scarce remaining groundwater as well as soil.  

US citiziens, get ready to be shocked:

http://www.foodispower.org/water-usage-privatization/

For example, in Colorado, over a period of a few years, Nestlé spent a large amount of money negotiating a water deal with the three-member Board of Chaffee County Commissioners and with the Aurora City Council, while buying land in the areas near where the Arkansas River runs. Close to 80 percent of the county’s 17,000 residents opposed the deal,[20] mainly because environmentalists (citing Nestlé’s detrimental impact in communities where they already operate) raised alarms about the potentially devastating consequences for Aurora City’s watershed and nearby wetlands.[21] After a 7 to 4 vote of approval by the Aurora City Council and a unanimous agreement by the Chaffee County Commissioners, over the next decade Nestlé will extract 650 million gallons of Arkansas Valley water so that every day they can load 25 trucks with 8,000 gallons of water, drive 120 miles to a bottling plant in Denver, and fill millions of plastic Arrowhead Springs water bottles to be sold in the western US.[22]In addition to being targeted by locals who want control of their water sources back, Nestlé is also at the epicenter of the growing bottled water controversy. The company dominates nearly a third of the lucrative US bottled water market[23] with seven domestically-produced subsidiary brands (including Arrowhead Springs, Calistoga and Poland Spring)—making Nestlé a key contributor to one of today’s most significant environmental threats. That is, US consumers purchase about 28 billion bottles of water every year, but recycle only about 23 percent of the plastic petroleum-based containers used for water or soda. The rest end up polluting roadsides, landfills and oceans, and leach toxins into ecosystems while taking about a millennium to degrade.[24]

from the german coca-cola website:



it should be time for a big shit storm

[1715608220]

1715608220

[1715608220]

1715608220

[1715608220]

1715608220

[(oYo)]

Methane and Water Vapor are way, way, way more effective greenhouse gasses than CO2, but for whatever reaon CO2 gets all the bad press.  Meanwhile, the world's forests grows as measure by sattelite far outpace the predictions of the past century due to increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

http://www.co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/forests.php

There's a lot more to atmospheric science than what 99% of the public understand and what is reported on main stream media outlets.

But I suspect the tropical forests will soon all die, due to water shortages.  This sort of thing can't continue for long -

http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-majority-of-earths-potable-water-trapped-in,38356/

wait what?
scientist try to get fresh water out of coke products??
how does the fresh water come into the coke products in the first place?
just stop drinking sugar+acid water you idiots

/edit

so coca cola company needs in average 2,16 liter fresh water to produce 1 liter cola products. (2014)
using cola products will kill humanity and nature in the long run - think about it every time you drink a coke.

oh wait, i forgot that coca cola products are one of the unhealthiest products on our planet. probaly as problematic as radioactive material.

https://www.worldwildlife.org/projects/wwf-coca-cola-s-work-to-conserve-fresh-water

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/03/02/coca-cola-and-nestle-are-sucking-us-dry-without-us.aspx

Human beings need five liters a day for hydration and 25 liters a day for minimum hygiene. That accounts for a whopping 1.5% of freshwater extraction for human purposes. Unconventional fuel-source extraction and ever-thirstier agriculture account for a wildly disproportionate share of the rest. The thinking goes that if there were a value placed on that remaining 98.5% of the water we use, we might use it in a more appropriate manner.

where is the the other 98,5% fresh water? over 2/3 of it is in cola and nestle products.

The companies' conflicts with communities in Latin America, Asia, and Africa are too numerous and sordid to be invented from whole cloth. Moreover, the simple fact is that sucking groundwater out of one place, bottling it, and shipping it for sale in another place that typically already has perfectly safe public water ranks high on the list of stupid things to do with scarce water.

So yes, Coca-Cola and Nestle are indeed sucking us dry. So are our modern agricultural practices and unconventional oil and gas extraction, to an even greater extent. A blended privatization scheme may indeed be part of the solution, but if it's done right, it will only make life harder for Coke and Nestle.

http://www.indiaresource.org/campaigns/coke/2006/cokewwf.html

The Coca-Cola company proudly boasts that it has a water use ratio of 2.7 to 1. That is, for every 2.7 liters of water (freshwater) it takes from the earth, it produces 1 liter of product. What happens to the remaining 1.7 liters (or 63%) of the water? It is used to clean bottles and machinery, and is discarded as wastewater.
[...]
Coca-Cola's water use ratio in India is 4 to 1 - that is, 75% of the freshwater it extracts is turned into wastewater. The company has indiscriminately discharged its wastewater into the surrounding fields, severely polluting the scarce remaining groundwater as well as soil.  

US citiziens, get ready to be shocked:

http://www.foodispower.org/water-usage-privatization/

For example, in Colorado, over a period of a few years, Nestlé spent a large amount of money negotiating a water deal with the three-member Board of Chaffee County Commissioners and with the Aurora City Council, while buying land in the areas near where the Arkansas River runs. Close to 80 percent of the county’s 17,000 residents opposed the deal,[20] mainly because environmentalists (citing Nestlé’s detrimental impact in communities where they already operate) raised alarms about the potentially devastating consequences for Aurora City’s watershed and nearby wetlands.[21] After a 7 to 4 vote of approval by the Aurora City Council and a unanimous agreement by the Chaffee County Commissioners, over the next decade Nestlé will extract 650 million gallons of Arkansas Valley water so that every day they can load 25 trucks with 8,000 gallons of water, drive 120 miles to a bottling plant in Denver, and fill millions of plastic Arrowhead Springs water bottles to be sold in the western US.[22]In addition to being targeted by locals who want control of their water sources back, Nestlé is also at the epicenter of the growing bottled water controversy. The company dominates nearly a third of the lucrative US bottled water market[23] with seven domestically-produced subsidiary brands (including Arrowhead Springs, Calistoga and Poland Spring)—making Nestlé a key contributor to one of today’s most significant environmental threats. That is, US consumers purchase about 28 billion bottles of water every year, but recycle only about 23 percent of the plastic petroleum-based containers used for water or soda. The rest end up polluting roadsides, landfills and oceans, and leach toxins into ecosystems while taking about a millennium to degrade.[24]

from the german coca-cola website:



it should be time for a big shit storm

Coca Cola and most every other NGO are a plague on this planet.

I watched a documentary about Coca Cola's impact in India and remember them saying it took nearly 3 litres of water to make 1 litre of coke. Water table levels that remained steady for generations had significantly dropped once Coca Cola moved into the territory. The company affected these water table levels for miles around causing people to have to either dig their wells deeper or travel elsewhere to find water. Not only did water levels drop, but the water also became contaminated. Coca Cola obviously denied they had anything to do with it.

[bryant.coleman]

OK.... what is your opinion about the deforestation of tropical forests? They are being cut down at a alarming rate. 20% of the Amazonian rainforest have been cut down in the past 20 years. Hardly any rainforest will remain in Africa and Indonesia by 2025. If there is no rainforest, what is the advantage of having rising CO2 levels, other than sea-level rise?

[Spendulus]

Methane and Water Vapor are way, way, way more effective greenhouse gasses than CO2, but for whatever reaon CO2 gets all the bad press.  Meanwhile, the world's forests grows as measure by sattelite far outpace the predictions of the past century due to increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

http://www.co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/forests.php

There's a lot more to atmospheric science than what 99% of the public understand and what is reported on main stream media outlets.

But I suspect the tropical forests will soon all die, due to water shortages.  This sort of thing can't continue for long -

http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-majority-of-earths-potable-water-trapped-in,38356/

What, you guys take it seriously?

It was from THE ONION!!!

[Wilikon]

Methane and Water Vapor are way, way, way more effective greenhouse gasses than CO2, but for whatever reaon CO2 gets all the bad press.  Meanwhile, the world's forests grows as measure by sattelite far outpace the predictions of the past century due to increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

http://www.co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/forests.php

There's a lot more to atmospheric science than what 99% of the public understand and what is reported on main stream media outlets.

But I suspect the tropical forests will soon all die, due to water shortages.  This sort of thing can't continue for long -

http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-majority-of-earths-potable-water-trapped-in,38356/

What, you guys take it seriously?

It was from THE ONION!!!

 

[Borisz]

After hearing the argument that "we should build more coal-fired power plants because the particle emissions reflect more heat generated by sunlight than the negative effect of the entrapped CO2" I thought I have heard everything.

[Wilikon]

After hearing the argument that "we should build more coal-fired power plants because the particle emissions reflect more heat generated by sunlight than the negative effect of the entrapped CO2" I thought I have heard everything.

So... The particles would deflect sunlight, thus reducing global warming all over the world... Like a (super) volcano? Hum.

[Borisz]

After hearing the argument that "we should build more coal-fired power plants because the particle emissions reflect more heat generated by sunlight than the negative effect of the entrapped CO2" I thought I have heard everything.

So... The particles would deflect sunlight, thus reducing global warming all over the world... Like a (super) volcano? Hum.

Something like that, yes. Supposedly it was measured how much light they reflect and how that would effect the micro climate. But not all over the world, of course, more like locally. Btw, after filtering in a coal plant there shouldn't be much particles left anyway. The concept is actually doable with artificial particles too, which makes probably more sense as it can be better controlled.

Coal power companies must put a lot of money in such research.

[Spendulus]

After hearing the argument that "we should build more coal-fired power plants because the particle emissions reflect more heat generated by sunlight than the negative effect of the entrapped CO2" I thought I have heard everything.

So... The particles would deflect sunlight, thus reducing global warming all over the world... Like a (super) volcano? Hum.

The windmills put a lot of smoke up in the atmosphere when they short and burn out, too.  This is a very good thing as it reflects sunlight, offsetting the carbon emissions generated during manufacture of the turbine (which is far greater than the carbon savings during use of the turbine).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Chtr76jJyA

Fortunately even after the demise of these projects they will still have great utility.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQZ_PhvRE14

[Borisz]

After hearing the argument that "we should build more coal-fired power plants because the particle emissions reflect more heat generated by sunlight than the negative effect of the entrapped CO2" I thought I have heard everything.

So... The particles would deflect sunlight, thus reducing global warming all over the world... Like a (super) volcano? Hum.

The windmills put a lot of smoke up in the atmosphere when they short and burn out, too.  This is a very good thing as it reflects sunlight, offsetting the carbon emissions generated during manufacture of the turbine (which is far greater than the carbon savings during use of the turbine).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Chtr76jJyA

Fortunately even after the demise of these projects they will still have great utility.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQZ_PhvRE14

 

[mrcashking]

Now all we gotta do is stop chopping them the fuck down.

This is the main thing that needs to be done, they are alive and have been for longer than our fathers and their fathers and we chop them down at the rate we do is sickening i really do hate it all them animals that get wiped out along the way. I have a friend that grows weed he swears by co2, that gets them super bushy, well so he says Stop chopping the lungs of the planet and our children might just survive the tree's have survived worse levels than current and they ended up around most of the planet for the dinosaurs.  

The algae and plankton in the oceans do more than the rain forests oxygenwise. But, have you seen that Clive Cussler, 2005 movie, Sahara? In that movie, some joker had a factory in Mali, Africa, that dumped a bunch of deadly toxins into the water of the Niger River. If they had made their way to the ocean, they would have killed off the Atlantic. I wonder how badly we are damaging the oceans with all the nuclear testing and toxic waste dumping in areas that are not regulated. We just might need the rain forests for oxygen some day.

Yeh i have seen a few documentaries about plankton which does about 90% of it currently if i remember right, but i also see that they are dying off unless that is false of course. I will watch that Clive Clussler 2005 movie tonight cheers!

That is the thing most of the population do not give a shit and dump everything and anything in the ocean especially the big companies that should get shut down and bankrupted but they end up getting bonuses and a big well done. Not quite but nothing really happens about it does it.

It is sad to think about how we as the people are letting these fkas do what they are doing to this planet if it carries on we won't have much longer to react before it is to late then we wish we would have done something, loads of different sea creatures are beaching in mass deaths probably for the reasons you state above

[Spendulus]

......loads of different sea creatures are beaching in mass deaths probably for the reasons you state above

I've walked down a lot of beaches and seen a couple dead porpoises, one tragic drowning of a girl, lots of washed ashore jellyfish, including the nasty purple ones, two red tides, and a couple cases where the weather flipped and fish died en mass before they could go where ever they go hide.

But those widely publicized mass deaths, aren't those something of a complete mystery as to cause?