Climate predictions should include impacts of CO2 on life

June 29, 2018, University of Exeter
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

Climate change predictions are not taking account of the full range of possible effects of rising carbon dioxide levels, researchers say.

Scientists currently use models in which of 1.5°C coincides with in the atmosphere of between 425 and 520 parts per million (ppm).

But analysis by the University of Exeter and the Met Office suggests that if the warms slower, 1.5°C warming could be delayed until CO2 reached higher levels—up to 765ppm if no other greenhouse gases played a part or their effects were counteracted by pollution particles in the atmosphere.

Increased CO2 affects , plant biodiversity and ocean acidification—and the researchers warn studies can underestimate such impacts by using too narrow a range of CO2 levels.

"As well as being a major cause of , CO2 also affects life directly," said Professor Richard Betts.

"Higher CO2 concentrations cause increased growth in many plant species. This causes a general 'greening' of vegetation, but also changes the makeup of ecosystems—some species do better than others. Slower-growing large tree species can lose out to faster-growing competitors.

"It can also reduce the effects of drought to some extent, because many plants use less water when CO2 is higher.

"Both of these factors can potentially enhance crop yields, possibly helping to offset some of the negative impacts of —although even if that happens, the nutritional value of the crops can be reduced as a result of the extra CO2.

"Rising CO2 also causes ocean acidification which is damaging to corals and some species of plankton.

"There is now a huge scientific effort going into figuring out what the world will look like when global warming reaches 1.5°C. To get the full picture, we need to consider these other effects of CO2 as well as those of rising temperatures."

There is uncertainty about how much the atmosphere will warm in response to particular greenhouse gases—a measure known as "climate sensitivity".

The study concluded that a wide range of CO2 concentrations could accompany global warming of 1.5°C or 2°C.

Explaining the new study, Professor Betts said he and Dr. Doug McNeall did calculations by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) "in reverse".

"Instead of calculating the probability of a particular amount of warming if CO2 doubles, we calculated the probability of a particular amount of CO2 rise for a particular level of warming (1.5°C and 2°C)," he said.

"This lets us estimate what the range of CO2 concentrations would be when global warming passes those levels, if CO2 were the only thing in the atmosphere that we are changing."

Explore further: Rising CO2 may increase dangerous weather extremes, whatever happens to global temperatures

More information: Richard A. Betts et al, How much CO2 at 1.5 °C and 2 °C?, Nature Climate Change (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41558-018-0199-5

Related Stories

Warming ponds could accelerate climate change

February 20, 2017

Rising temperatures could accelerate climate change by reducing the amount of carbon dioxide stored in ponds and increasing the methane they release, new research shows.

Recommended for you

Long-term study shows atmospheric biome fluctuates by season

November 13, 2018

A team of researchers with the LTER Environmental Monitoring Observatory in the Aigüestortes National Park in Spain has found that there is seasonal variation in atmospheric microbes. In their paper published in Proceedings ...

48 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

johnhew
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 29, 2018
Bruno discovered that the impact of CO2 on life is green
TrollBane
4.6 / 5 (10) Jun 29, 2018
"Bruno discovered that the impact of CO2 on life is green"
Which Bruno? Gerussi? (Canuck in-joke of the day complete.)
ZoeBell
Jun 29, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
philstacy9
2 / 5 (12) Jun 29, 2018
The good thing is that political propaganda global warming "science" articles have become less frequent.
howhot3
3.5 / 5 (10) Jun 29, 2018
The problem here is the article doesn't go far enough. Based on the exponential rise in CO2 from just fossil fuel combustion, estimates for 520ppm are simply wishful thinking. It will easily be double that by 2100. We jumped over 100ppm in just 5 years. That translate to at least an +8 degreeC in global warming. Scorched Earth in other words! Baked Earth. Most life will be extinct by 2200. This summer will be just a toe in the bathtub for what it will be like.

I really don't think man will survive this The only hope would be to create a technology that would extract and sequester CO2 (kind of what CO2 rich fossil do already). Extracting CO2 from the Air would need to be done on a massive scale. Basically people of the planet will need to massively geoengineer the Earth to remove all of the CO2 it's released, Ironically it will probably take massive amounts of energy just to remove the CO2 which will be a an insurmountable conundrum that takes mankind down.


howhot3
3.5 / 5 (8) Jun 29, 2018
Sorry; It was not 100ppm in just 5 years. It was 391.15 in 2011 to 411.32 in 2018. It was just 20 ppm in 5 years. So 82yrs until 2100. Assume a linear rise it 82/5 * 20 = 739ppm. But if you see the graphs of global CO2 it's increasing exponentially so you have 740ppm and then some. It's over 1000ppm easy.

So even with a that correction, we are still in worst shape for 2100 than the article suggests. 8C is looking mighty good. You should pack your families and settle the polar regions if you want to live this heatwave out. But be prepared, Atmospheric CO2 lasts about 1500 years before the planet will take it back in. So you'll need to live there a pretty long time before this foobar is over.


antigoracle
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 29, 2018
Sorry; It was not 100ppm in just 5 years. It was 391.15 in 2011 to 411.32 in 2018. It was just 20 ppm in 5 years. So 82yrs until 2100. Assume a linear rise it 82/5 * 20 = 739ppm. But if you see the graphs of global CO2 it's increasing exponentially so you have 740ppm and then some. It's over 1000ppm easy.

HEE...HAWW You should pack your families and settle the polar regions if you want to live this heatwave out. But be prepared, Atmospheric CO2 lasts about 1500 years before the planet will take it back in. So you'll need to live there a pretty long time before this foobar is over.


-- howShat da Turd
The Chicken Little Jackass brays again. This jackass claims to know the "science" and can predict the future, so he's here again just HEE...HAWWING his ignorance.
Human CO2 emissions during the 1930s were insignificant compared to now, yet the globe witnessed the hottest temperatures and most extreme weather. Explain that jackass?
howhot3
3.3 / 5 (7) Jun 29, 2018
@antigoracle; Your a just a plane dumb simpleton. Anything I say will be over your head trump brand looser. So enjoy your baked earth buddy.
antigoracle
1.7 / 5 (10) Jun 29, 2018
@antigoracle; Your a just a plane dumb simpleton. Anything I say will be over your head trump brand looser. So enjoy your baked earth buddy.
-- howShat da Turd.
Of course it will be over my head, because that's how a jackass like you brays your ignorance....HIGH AND WIDE.

PS: Please learn the difference between YOUR and YOU'RE.
Eg. YOU'RE are a jackass because YOUR inbred parents dropped you as a baby.
howhot3
3.9 / 5 (7) Jun 29, 2018
@antigoracle. I'm sorry your recognized your problem. But you and I are not the issue on this. It's the future of our planet and the corruption of that future by the massive industries that insist of fossil fuel consumption.
Shootist
2 / 5 (12) Jun 29, 2018
We have 100 years of known data. plug that into your models and extrapolate the future (today) starting 100 years ago. your shit don't work, does it? wildly mad, isn't it.

QED
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (8) Jun 29, 2018
The program is for the rich to make enough money by polluting the future to survive the mess they themselves made while the proles do the dying.
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (9) Jun 29, 2018
And of course the brown proles will die first.
antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 29, 2018
@antigoracle. I'm sorry your recognized your problem. But you and I are not the issue on this. It's the future of our planet and the corruption of that future by the massive industries that insist of fossil fuel consumption.
-- howShat da Turd
Uh huh. Tell us jackass, when did you stop burning fossil fuel or consuming power generated from it?
howhot3
4.1 / 5 (9) Jun 29, 2018
-- howShat da Turd
Uh huh. Tell us jackass, when did you stop burning fossil fuel or consuming power generated from it?
Much. @antiboring-acle boozo boy what are you going to do about your fossil fuel usage? What are you doing about YOUR CO2 foot print? Are you using an LED lamp yet?

The issue is that the low value of +500ppm CO2 for 2100 is wildly optimistic. Simple math shows it will be at a minimum +700ppm and more realistically like +1000ppm. That's up in the delta +8C for a global average. Enjoy your summers bozo.

leetennant
3.9 / 5 (7) Jun 29, 2018
The program is for the rich to make enough money by polluting the future to survive the mess they themselves made while the proles do the dying.


While this outrages me, the idea they can buy themselves out of climate change is so laughable I almost want to be here to see them realise they can't.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2018


Obvious question to ask all Global Warming/CC aficionados such as those here is:
1. How do you heat your home in the winter?
2. How do you keep your home cool in the hot summer weather?
3. Why do you cook your food or barbecue with electricity, gas/propane, wood stove/briquettes? Or do you eat your pork and beans cold?
4. Are you buying gasoline/diesel for your motor vehicle/boat/airplane? And are you getting an oil change when required?
5. Do you hop on an airplane to get from point A to point B and the return trip even though the fuel is polluting the atmosphere?
6. Do you watch TV, listen to the radio, read a newspaper/magazine?
7. Do you recharge your phone?

If so, then YOU are a POLLUTER. You are a contributor to Global Warming/CC and you have the utter gall to accuse others of doing it while YOU are JUST AS GUILTY.

Go live in a cave, ride a mule, use palm leaves for bedding/clothing. Give up your phone and other electrical conveniences if you are TRULY concerned.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2018
I'll wager that you can't do it.
howhot3
3.7 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2018
We have 100 years of known data. plug that into your models and extrapolate the future (today) starting 100 years ago. your shit don't work, does it? wildly mad, isn't it.

QED


But this is a little more than 100years.

https://data.giss....ext.txt

And this is right now;

https://www.co2.earth

1 and 2. That is all you need to predict out for the next 200yrs. You seem to think that is a long time... way beyond human capability to understand. But we can manipulate atoms individually, so if thinking its *wildly mad* to project global climate 200yrs out, you simply a looser,
howhot3
4.1 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2018
@stupid_Egg_Unit... yeap. Thanks for your complete demonstration of what a rightwing bozo looks like. Now can you do an impression of a trumster?
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.8 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2018
8. Give up your use of computers, GPS,
9. And for YOU, howhot3, I suggest that you switch to roller skates or skateboards for travel instead of riding in cars, buses, etc.

I notice that you hate all of my 9 suggestions, which means, of course, that you and these other pretenders will CONTINUE TO POLLUTE THE PLANET - while contributing nothing to the effective cleanup, although you are able to quote percentages. But do you recycle?

I also suggest that you go back to high school English classes to improve your language skills, which are sorely limited.
howhot3
4.1 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2018
@stupid_Egg_Unit... yeap. Suddenly I'm back in 1948... where movie star John Garfield said "Everything is a mistake!". Words of wisdom for you when you have to decide dairy creamer or non-dairy creamer.

You know the english language can be very tricky for non-english speaking russians. You one of them? One of them there trumpy troll types? I bet you are. I suggest you go back to a pond and grow a pair... tadpole. Legs I mean.

greenonions1
5 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2018
@ Surveillance - in a way - I completely agree with your points. I am a part of the problem. I heat with gas, cool with electricity, drive a gas car etc. etc. etc. The reason I can't go off grid currently is cost. But yes - I have blood on my hands. Now - for me - the question comes regarding what to do. I am making changes. I grow food in my yard. I am setting up to start a business - growing food on a very small scale - but hopefully with the potential to support myself. I plan to make this business a model - that can be adopted by others. Bren Smith with Greenwave is way ahead of me - but I think doing great work - check it out. I am signed up for 100% wind power, and have a relatively small footprint (combined utility bill around $150 month. I am getting ready to buy an electric car, and will put solar panels on roof. Again - cost is a big issue. This seems like a better option than living in a cave. What are you doing?
Eikka
2.4 / 5 (8) Jun 30, 2018
so if thinking its *wildly mad* to project global climate 200yrs out, you simply a looser,


Projecting a billiards game 7 turns forwards is also practically impossible, because chaotic systems diverge quickly and unpredictably - they're extremely sensitive to the starting conditions and knowing the exact starting condition is practically impossible. The error of your model grows exponentially past the known data.

That's why predicting the weather is still pretty much guesswork past 3-4 days despite the huge amount of computing power at our disposal. If you input the constant for gravity wrong at the 14th decimal point, the models can show palm trees growing in Alaska two weeks later.

Trying to predict the climate 200 years into the future out of a few sparse datapoints from 100 years ago is a fool's game even if you could model the exact physics involved, because there's so many unkowns in the starting conditions of the model.

Eikka
2.3 / 5 (6) Jun 30, 2018
I am signed up for 100% wind power


That doesn't mean a thing - the power you get is still anything that happens on the grid. Read the small print in your contract.

Why this matter is, people think they're being green by buying into these feelgood schemes, but when they actually flip their light switches, somewhere a gas turbine throttles up because the wind turbines or solar panels do not respond to demand variations.
greenonions1
4.4 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2018
That doesn't mean a thing - the power you get is still anything that happens on the grid.
Thanks captain obvious - I am fully aware of what it means. Oklahoma gets around 30% of it power from wind - and is in process of building one of the largest wind farms in the country on top (wind catcher). So what we do by signing up for wind - is communicate to OG and E our willingness to pay a little extra each month - to support renewable energy. I figure it beats spending your life telling people that what little they are able to do - is nothing.
antigoracle
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2018
@stupid_Egg_Unit... yeap. HAWW....HEE...HAWW....HEE

You know the english language can be very tricky for non-english speaking russians. You one of them? One of them there trumpy troll types? I bet you are. I suggest you go back to a pond and grow a pair... tadpole. Legs I mean.

-- howShat da Turd
LMAO.
You still haven't learned the difference between YOU'RE and YOUR. You know the English language can be very tricky for ignorant Chicken Little jackasses. You one of them? One of them there jackass troll types? I know you are. I suggest you go back to your cesspool of ignorance and grow one...TURD. A brain I mean.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3.4 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2018
@ Surveillance - in a way - I completely agree with your points. I am a part of the problem. I heat with gas, cool with electricity, drive a gas car etc. etc. etc. The reason I can't go off grid currently is cost. . . .the question comes regarding what to do. I am making changes. I grow food in my yard. . . . .start a business - growing food on a very small scale - but hopefully with the potential to support myself. I plan to make this business a model - that can be adopted by others. . . . .I am signed up for 100% wind power, and have a relatively small footprint (combined utility bill around $150 month. . . . .buy an electric car, and will put solar panels on roof. Again - cost is a big issue. This seems like a better option than living in a cave. What are you doing?

says GreenO

You're off to a good start. You seem to understand what is at stake and are willing to be a good role model. But not everyone feels as you do.
-CONTINUED-
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2018
-CONTINUED-
Most humans are too wrapped up in their selfish desires to get as much 'pleasure' for themselves and are unconcerned with what is happening to neighbors, community, country, the World. Some of the BIGGEST offenders are the Elites such as al gore, Hollywood celebrities and certain politicians who continue to fly and ride in gas-guzzling cars and airplanes and living immodestly in their mansion(s), all while berating and accusing others of not following their commandments.
"Do as I say, not as I do" is the mantra of Leftist-Socialist hypocritical ideologists.

As for me, my entire monthly utility bill comes to about US$76.00. I drive as little as possible and try to conserve fuel. I prefer solar power for lighting, recharging, etc. due to my concern for birds in flight being killed by windmills. I keep my house cold in winter and wear an extra sweater for warmth.
-CONTINUED-
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2018
-CONTINUED-
In a hot summer I have a system for cooling indoor air with a series of large empty soda bottles with the bottoms cut off that are held by a plastic grid that is the same size as the windows. The outside air cools as it passes through the bottle and whooshes into the house. The plans/instructions are on the 'net.
It is a very 'Green' system. I had to install awnings to keep the rain out, which was not that expensive.

Oh, and I also recycle all aluminium, steel cans, cardboard, plastics, glass and batteries. I collect empty eggshells in a trash can, crush the shells and mix it with compost and use it for my vegetable garden. I ask my neighbors for their used coffee grinds to add to some of the compost. I have convinced my colleagues to follow my lead wrt recycling recyclables and they are all happy to do it.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2018
I am signed up for 100% wind power


That doesn't mean a thing - the power you get is still anything that happens on the grid. Read the small print in your contract.

Why this matter is, people think they're being green by buying into these feelgood schemes, but when they actually flip their light switches, somewhere a gas turbine throttles up because the wind turbines or solar panels do not respond to demand variations.

says Eikka

If I'm not mistaken, power companies will keep you on the grid even if you are not using their electrical power and have solar and/or wind power.
The reason for that is that wind and solar power is too variable and can't always be relied on to perform every minute of the night/day. Dark rainclouds and lack of wind throw a monkey-wrench into the mix, so that your electric power could cease UNLESS you have a large wall of batteries to collect electrical power during windy and sunny days. And those batteries are expensive.
doogsnova
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2018
Howhot3: My sources said that CO2 was 460ppm in 2010! I don't know what it is now, but probably around 500.
Also/related, the human population of Earth is over 8.85 billion.

The issue is that the low value of +500ppm CO2 for 2100 is wildly optimistic. Simple math shows it will be at a minimum +700ppm and more realistically like +1000ppm. That's up in the delta +8C for a global average. Enjoy your summers bozo.


Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (10) Jul 01, 2018
Denying for jebus. Trumpoids have no imagination. They think stone age sheep herders are smarter than scientists, never mind that stone age sheep herders didn't have refrigerators, computers, or jet aircraft.

They are the low-information voters. @Stupid_Meathead_Unit and @boracle are great examples of this.

And just for the record, I installed a 98% efficient forced-air furnace and an on-demand gas water heater 10 years ago. The exhaust pipe for my furnace is PVC; that's possible because the furnace sucks all the heat out and puts it into my house instead of out the exhaust. I've been saving since before you nutjobs were born; you can't possibly be older than 10 and be as stupid as you are.
HeloMenelo
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 01, 2018

The Chicken Little Jackass brays again. This jackass claims to know the "science" and can predict the future, so he's here again just HEE...HAWWING his ignorance.
Human CO2 emissions during the 1930s were insignificant compared to now, yet the globe witnessed the hottest temperatures and most extreme weather. Explain that jackass?


Oh the dumbness... the goon antisciencegorilla and his trolls thumping their chests as usual, do you actually know what earth looks like from outside a tree ? ? Guess swinging the branches makes you feel safe not knowing how to face reality or terrified of the word science and what it actually proves.
greenonions1
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 01, 2018
@Surveillance - thanks for the reply - you are doing a lot to move the needle. One of the biggest problems we face here in the U.S. is the staggering complexity of the system. It is impossible to understand taxes, social security, health care, investments etc. etc. Our lives become consumed with just trying to keep our heads above water. We have created an untameable monster - that we can't live without. I agree about most people being too wrapped up... but I also see how complex the system is - and how hard it can be to break free. The crappy education system we have does not give people the tools to deal with the complexity. I think it is deliberate on the part of the political class. Just one example - Trump, Bannon etc. call themselves 'populists' and demonize the 'elites.' Could you find a bigger irony? But they won the election!!!!
Da Schneib
3.2 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2018
Be careful, @greenos. This one is one of the religious fanatics.
howhot3
4 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2018
Projecting a billiards game 7 turns forwards is also practically impossible, because chaotic items diverge quickly and unpredictably - they're extremely sensitive to the starting conditions and knowing the exact starting condition is practically impossible. The error of your model grows exponentially past the known data.


I totally disagree. We model systems all the time projecting out the physics far in to the future. Your car engine is modelled in simulation to catch flaws that would show up after 100 of years of use. Ansys, Comsol and the like are used for modeling mechanical systems way into the future in high detail. People trust those results. Similarly, in climate, we can model climate using known and well established physics to predict climate 100 years from now with ease.

We know the results from that, but predicting the human response is the unknown. Including denial, deceit, deception, propaganda and other tactics used for self benefit.

rrwillsj
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2018
Oh hh3, I mourn that I will never have the opportunity of playing billiards or pool with you. Thinking you can beat the odds against random has been the ruination of many a gamblin' man.

irst write down the sequence of balls onto which pocket. We'll just lay that pad down over here to consult as you shoot. Right next to our bets.
Now.... chalk your cue
Rack'em up!
And knock'em back!
Daddy's Baby wants to shop for a new pair of shoes.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2018
@Surveillance - thanks for the reply - you are doing a lot to move the needle. One of the biggest problems we face here in the U.S. is the staggering complexity of the system. It is impossible to understand taxes, social security, health care, investments etc. etc.


Income taxes will eventually have to increase to pay for support of the illegal aliens invading the southern borders AND the unaccompanied children (Obama's "Dreamers"). Hopefully, those who demonstrate in the streets with their pretend caring about illegal alien children temporarily removed from their families will be willing to shell out some serious money to help pay for supporting those children (and the MS-13 gang members also).

SS will have to increase to take care of the old people on Medicare and Medicaid as their numbers grow to overrun the amount of young and middle aged people who will have to pay into that old Liberal-Socialist Ponzi Scheme started by the Democrat Party.
-CONTINUED-
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2018
-CONTINUED-
@GreenO
Your "Obamacare" was a disaster from the getgo. It was too expensive for most Americans to pay out of their paycheck and Obama lied so often about it being less costly and that "if you like your plan/doctor, you can keep your plan/doctor". Only rich people could afford it, and they were able to afford their own non-governmental medical/doctor plans.
And Obama was a big fan of, and believed in, Saul Alinsky and his "Rules for Radicals" on how to basically Divide and Conquer the USA with methods that were used by the Communists. He would have accomplished his goals if Hillary had won the election. But half of all American citizens can't comprehend that fact.

WRT Investments, the best and safest investment is to open a Savings Account with as high an interest as you can get...and put a thousand in it every month, if at all possible. Physical gold is a great investment if you can afford it and keep it locked and secured
-CONTINUED-
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (6) Jul 01, 2018
Before it was "Obamacare" it was "Romneycare." You liked it then. What's the matter, can't stand to have a black guy do it?

Pretty obvious, there, @Stupid_Meathead_Unit.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 02, 2018
-CONTINUED-
Our lives become consumed with just trying to keep our heads above water. We have created an untameable monster - that we can't live without...The crappy education system we have does not give people the tools to deal with the complexity. I think it is deliberate on the part of the political class.

says GreenO

The crappy educational system in the USA is crappy since it mostly ceased to emphasise Language skills and STEM, and instead is now emphasising transgenderism, LGBQT and the 37 or so different genders that Academics now INSIST that schoolchildren must be taught (for the sake of equality), so that the children will be able to choose which of the 37 genders they want to be. Obama did nothing to stop it.
There is a sickness in America and the Democrat Party is responsible for it.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 02, 2018
-CONTINUED-
Just one example - Trump, Bannon etc. call themselves 'populists' and demonize the 'elites.' Could you find a bigger irony? But they won the election!!!!

Says GreenO

And it's a good thing that Donald Trump won the election or America would be saddled with the 'dog and pony show' that is Hillary Clinton. It is now known that Obama would have subtly taken over Hillary's presidential powers in order to continue his own Socialist goals to destroy America from within, via Alinsky's Rules for Radicals.
Hillary was, and is, physically and emotionally ill and unfit to be president. President Trump made some mistakes in his past, but he has straightened up and is flying right. Meanwhile, about half of American citizens are stoned crazy. That is also the fault of Obama and Socialist Academics. The colleges are full of them. I don't hold much hope for America's future because of it.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 02, 2018
Oh hh3, I mourn that I will never have the opportunity of playing billiards or pool with you. Thinking you can beat the odds against random has been the ruination of many a gamblin' man.

irst write down the sequence of balls onto which pocket. We'll just lay that pad down over here to consult as you shoot. Right next to our bets.
Now.... chalk your cue
Rack'em up!
And knock'em back!
Daddy's Baby wants to shop for a new pair of shoes.

says rrwillsj

There is a house in New Orleans, they call The Rising Sun...
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (12) Jul 02, 2018
Your car engine is modelled in simulation to catch flaws that would show up after 100 of years of use.....HAWW...HEE....HAWW....HEEE
-- howShat da Turd
Really!!! 100 YEARS??

Keep braying jackass..perhaps someday you'll actually hear yourself.
howhot3
4.3 / 5 (6) Jul 02, 2018
I see the the wing nuts are nervous! So you climate change deniers are just a goofy bunch aren't you? You all can't explain how your damn black smoking diesel engine can last 100 years... (ok for you @antialgore, I'll say 10 based on how you drive in swamps and stuff), but the best you can do is a weekly forecast from the weather underground, or a round of BS on fox news? You all are WEAK!

So the @stupid_egg_unit is all like Hillary this, Obama that... etc. What a bozo. So off topic and sooo wordy. He probably belongs to a deep secret society that likes to get naked and dance in the Croatia forests drinking vodka while trying to practice american english. And my best bud, @antialgore just thinks everyone and anyone is a jackass because he's a simple minded type.

But you denier types, when it's time to fill up your gas tank you know the consequences if you don't. Well, the subtitle global temperature increases is simply like reading the fuel gauge approaching zero.

howhot3
4.3 / 5 (6) Jul 02, 2018
It's estimated the total world oil reserves is 1350 billion barrels. Average daily oil consumption is estimated at 85.6 million barrels/day. 1350 / 0.0856 = 15771 days of oil left so 15771 / 356 days/year = 44 years of oil left; more or less.

3.15 barrels produces 1.0 tonne of CO2. So in 44 years, we will have dumped 1350GB/3.15B = 428,571,428,571 (429 billion tons CO2). Since CO2 takes 1500 years to be removed from the atmosphere, that is in addition to what we already have released.

Every 15 gigatons of CO2 will rise CO2 by 1.0ppm and 50ppm will rise global temps by 1C. So in a 44 year period, 429GT / 15GT/ppm = 28.6ppm. 28.5 ppm/50 ppm per degreeC = 0.572C (1.03F). Now recognize that is just from Oil. No coal, or gas, or cement or methane or anything added. This is just oil's contribution to global warming.

Coal creates 2.86 tons of CO2 per ton of coal combusted. That is over 7 times oil. It's contribution is HUGE!

HeloMenelo
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 02, 2018
Your car engine is modelled in simulation to catch flaws that would show up after 100 of years of use.....HAWW...HEE....HAWW....HEEE
-- howShat da Turd
Really!!! 100 YEARS??

Keep braying jackass..perhaps someday you'll actually hear yourself.

Now we know the main character behind I R baboon (actually we've always known lol...)

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.