Where is all the carbon coming from

[imamartian]

i think you have to work to percentages.... if my email inbox complains that it's full, i delete the 3 or 4 ten meg attachments rather than 150,000 small emails (forgive the maths, my calculator has been 'used' by the kids).

So i reckon we should focus on big issues like huge industrial nations... like india/china who are building new power staions everyday - and i don't mean stop them, but lets look to alternatives here.... and of course cows, and shrimps, and whatever other huge scale impact there is.... not your average lightbulb con....

 

[empip]

It can be a mistake to just open all windows when 'tis hot outside.
Our trick is to close windows and blinds on the sunnyside - front until midday - side to late afternoon - rear after that.
Open windows and blinds on non sunny sides...

A 16" fan before open window very early morning can get a room down to ambient in an hour or so <15° at times.
--

 

[screech]

i've worked in 'eco homes' which are designed to keep as much heat in as possible and the people that live there say whilst you don't need much heating in the winter, through spring/summer the house is a horrible place to live as it's too hot and you can't cool it down enough and you spend the entire summer with all your doors and windows open just trying to get the house back to a bearable temperature, and they've tried keeping curtains and windows shut during the day. some have since had air con installed. you have to love this efficient world our dictators are trying to create

 

[Goldberg]

the first rule of science states "matter can be neither created nor destroyed" so all this carbon we are saving must be somewhere.

The "rule" doesn't always hold true though, does it?

For example, the cr*p that you're talking had to come from somewhere, but it isn't obvious where.

 

[maltaron]

The statement is absolutely true. Ask anyone who has studied physics and stop continually rubbishing every one elses posts

 

[EddieM]

I don't really understand your post? where does all the carbon (as in CO2) come from? the burining of fossil fuels. The less you burn, the less CO2 ?? Obviously I am missing your point?

 

[dextrous]

Whilst I am fully in agreement with saving energy and recycling I am getting most concerned at the lies we are are being told. If we added up all the carbon we are adding to the atmosphere the earth would not exist.
The EU is now banning proper light bulbs and the Government is telling that this will save 5 million tons of carbon a year, everyone who takes a long distance flight add 1.5 tons, every power station adds tons, and not longer ago we were told that if we charge our phones on solar power we save 1 million tons a year. Where the hell is all this carbon? the first rule of science states "matter can be neither created nor destroyed" so all this carbon we are saving must be somewhere.

Matter cannot be created nor destroyed, but this doesn't mean that you can't change one thing to another. Burning fossil fuels doesn't lose matter, it converts it to different forms of matter, including heat and carbon dioxide.

As for the ban on incandescent light bulbs, there is no ban on selling it, but there is a ban on importing it from non-eu countries. EU countries are not banned from manufacturing it though, as far as I am aware, since there is an export market available. Also there isn't a ban on using it for commercial properties, and there is no way of a retailer being able to verify where a customer intends to use it. So, all in all, the whole thing about light bulbs is flawed.

 

[ToffeeNick]

flawed logic there.

not really when you actually think about it as its been proven by the person who started adding ice cubes to soft drinks many years ago. It makes no odds whether 10 ice cubes float in the liquid individually or if 8 of them are above the drinks level but attached to the other 2 that are floating in the liquid, they are still exerting the same pressure on the liquid so therefore displacing the same amount of liquid.

the majority of the threatened melt is not currently below water level like your ice in a glass scenario.

for your statement to work the ice would have to be suspended from air.

 

[EddieM]

but ice is less dense than water, i.e. it floats incidentally one of the quite remarkable properties of a substance we take for granted. Therefore you would have to calculate it's relative densities to know whether it would overflow. my guess guess would be yes it would.

 

[dextrous]

but ice is less dense than water, i.e. it floats incidentally one of the quite remarkable properties of a substance we take for granted. Therefore you would have to calculate it's relative densities to know whether it would overflow. my guess guess would be yes it would.

Think Archimedes prevails over this one. Assuming the mass of 1cm cube of water at say 4 degrees is 1g. Then after the expands into its ice form, it will still have a mass of 1g, and will displace the same amount of water within the tumbler as adding it in liquid form. Thus the level of the water within the glass will remain constant throughout.

 

[maltaron]

Eddiem, The point is that according to claims if we add up all the figures for the amount of carbon we produce it probably be more than the weight of the Earth. Its certainly true that if everyone on a flight to the USA produces 1.5tons of carbon then that carbon must be on the aircraft to start with, allbeit maybe in a different form. Add that to the weight of the passengers, the aircraft, and sufficient fuel and the plane will not get off the ground.
Can I just make another point "How do you weigh a gas"

 

[dave1953]

No doubt someone will put me right on this one but is it true the UK has an obligation to the EU to reduce our carbon footprint by the year whatever and if we don't there is a huge multi million pound fine involved.Considering our monthly contributions to these wan--rs allready who signed us up for that one and were was the referendum on it. Makes oi spit

 

[Inky Pete]

Eddiem, The point is that according to claims if we add up all the figures for the amount of carbon we produce it probably be more than the weight of the Earth. Its certainly true that if everyone on a flight to the USA produces 1.5tons of carbon then that carbon must be on the aircraft to start with, allbeit maybe in a different form. Add that to the weight of the passengers, the aircraft, and sufficient fuel and the plane will not get off the ground.
Can I just make another point "How do you weigh a gas"

The 1.5 tonnes per passenger figure includes a proportion of the energy used to manufacture the aircraft, a proportion of the energy used to build the airport, the refining of the fuel, the transportation of the fuel, the energy for the runway lights, and all sorts of other energy useages which are directly related to the flight - but are not actually on board the plane.

BTW you weigh a gas just the same way you weigh anything else. Put it in a container and see how much heavier the container gets.

 

[EddieM]

Um, I haven't got any specific figures available but are you confusing Carbon with Carbon Dioxide??

Eg. 1g of octane C8H18 will completely combust to

2C8H18 +25O2-----16CO2+18H20

Viz 16C atoms atomic mass 16 x 12 = 192 combusts to 704 CO2.

Again I've probably missed the point.

 

[Inky Pete]

If the figure quoted refers to the weight of CO2 produced, rather than the weight of carbon burnt, then you're right.

1 atom of carbon (atomic weight 12) combines with 2 atoms of oxgen from the air (atomic weight 16 each) to form 1 molecule of CO2 with a molecular weight of 44

So, 1 ton of carbon in fuel produces 3.6666 tons of carbon dioxide discharged into the atmosphere.

BTW, the mass of the Earth is reckoned to be about 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 metric tons (6,000 million, million, million)