London Low Emission Zone - Feasiblility Study

I cannot find this for the life of me. I know that typically 19.4 lbs of co2 are released for every gallon of gasoline, but I need to know how much compressed natural gas (CNG) produces!!!

CNG or compressed natural gas, (CH4) is a compressed gas and not a liquid. It is not typically measured in gallons. Liquids that are stable at room temperature and pressure are measured in gallons. LNG (liquid natural gas) is a liquid because it has been compressed and cooled.

In this article: http://www.triplepundit.com/2006/11/askpablo-clean-natural-gas/ you will find a very careful discussion of gasoline and CNG emissions. It turns out that CNG produces less particulate matter and about 70% of the CO2 that would be required from a gasoline powered vehicle.

… and all that wonderful technology he swore he would create?

Why does he care what other countries do about CO2? Shouldn’t he just lead the way, set an example and cut our emissions to zero? Besides, didn’t he promise we would get wealthier in the process via green economy?

THE PROBLE IS THAT THE "AMERICAN LIFESTYLE" OR RATHER "DEVELOPED NATION LIFESTYLE IS BASED OF EXCESS CO2 PRODUCTION!

NOW WHICH POLITICIAN WOULD ASK THE PEOPLE TO COMPROMISE IT AND BE ELECTED AGAIN!?!

WORLD BANK SAYS: DEVELOPING NATIONS HAVE TO "PAY" THE PRICE FOR THE EMISSION OF THE DEVELOPED NATIONS!
EN THAT TOO FOR 80% OF THE CO2 FROM DEVELOPED NATIONS!

ESTIMATES SAY DEVELOPED NATIONS NEED TO HELP DEVELOPING NATIONS WITH JUST 1% OF THEIR GDP TO REDUCE GREEN HOUSE EFFECT SIGNIFICANTLY!
BUT THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO….

Let me start by saying that i am a strong believer in AGW.
A recurring argument presented by the deniers is that "the atmosphere is far to large to be affected by human emissions of CO2", would someone be able to explain to me why this is not the case?

Thanks.

The atmosphere may seem to large to be affected but this conclusion is drawn from one’s limited perspective. Actual measurements of CO2 have been regularly conducted and compared with proxy measurements of past levels. The portion since 1958 as directly measured is known as the Kelling Curve.

Since pre-industrial times CO2 levels have risen from 280ppmv to the current level of 387ppmv. Prior to this period CO2 varied little from 280ppmv for several thousand years.

Isotopic analysis of the carbon making up the CO2 molecules present in the atmosphere indicates a growing proportion of "old carbon". This demonstrates the source to be the burning of fossil fuels.

So, atmospheric CO2 has increased by about 38% during the time of industrialized societies and we know a significant source of that increase to be from the burning of fossil fuels.

With all the propaganda about "global warming", "global climate change", and being "carbon neutral", has anyone thought of the effects a drastic reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions would have on plants that need C02? If we reduce carbon emissions enough to make any difference in the climate, wouldn’t it have a negative impact on our crops, trees, and other essential plant life?

This is easy to answer, it would cause massive crop reduction world wide. Co2 is a major part of higher crop yields in the modern world and why the world oceans release co2 from storage as they warm. This is why co2 rise always follows climate change so that as the oceans warm the release co2 to feed the growing numbers of plants that need it to grow and and produce more food and oxygen for population increase promoted by warmer temperatures. The liberal mind has never been able to comprehend how science works and how changes in solar output causes environmental changes on earth. But this is why in the past knowledgeable societies like the Hindu and Celtic ones segregated liberal minds into societies that could not influence society while still providing work and food for these mentally disadvantaged types.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:0Master_Past_20000yrs_temperatures_icecore_Vostok_150dpi.png
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/global_warming.html
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
http://reasonmclucus.tripod.com/CO2myth.html
http://mc-computing.com/qs/Global_Warming/Atmospheric_Analysis.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation
Where the heat came from and why it was abnormally cold previously
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~dbunny/research/global/215.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_minimum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

And how expensive is this going to be?
It’s a 2000 Chevy Cavalier
And, yes, engine light is on.

needs a tune up. plugs, wires,cap and rotor. fuel injection or carb? if carb it could need adjustment. if fuel injection pobably the o2 sensor,but could also be, map sensor, maf sensor or egr valve. what kind of car will help me answer better.

Ok I was wondering how all the carbon emissions that cars release into the air affect the different Earth systems, such as the Lithosphere, Biosphere, Hydrosphere, and the Atmosphere. Please try to include how it affects all of the Earth systems but if you know just about 1 please let me know. Also can you try to list some web-sites where I might find this information. Thank You

The numbers are so small that there is NO effect on any systems.

Briefly, what is a continuous spectrum, an emission spectrum and an absorption spectrum?

continuous, it has output at every frequency over a band.

emission, the output is on a small set of discrete fixed frequencies

absorption, is the same as continuous except that there are a small set of discrete fixed frequencies at which there is not output.

.

How is this calculated and why is bio diesel so popular?

CO2 emissions are very similar to emissions from petrodiesel. The difference is, this is carbon that’s extracted from something that was alive recently, generally a plant (it is possible to make biodiesel from animal fat, but that is not done). Plants absorb CO2 from the air, so when you burn biodiesel you are re-releasing CO2 that was in the air during the plant’s life. The long term effects on CO2 are very different from petrodiesel, which releases CO2 that was in the atmosphere millions of years ago.

I have a Peugeot 306 1.9 diesel car. This is 11 yrs old and the handbook says it emits 165g of CO2 per KM. I have a journey of 13 miles to get to work with is mostly extra urban driving at 60mph. How many newspaper /magazine pages would i have to recycle to offset the CO2 from a return journey to work?

You would do more for you carbon foot print by reading online or borrowing magazines from the library. I consider myself pretty eco friendly, but I’ve never tried to figure out what trade offs I need to make to offset certain activities. Instead I look at various areas of my life to see where I can make better choices. Driving a car for 11 years is an earth friendly choice, most eco people agree it is better for the environment to drive a car until it dies than to buy a new one every few years.

US manufactures are more efficient and produce less CO2 than their Chinese competitors.
http://americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=3225
Should the Obama administration put a high carbon tax on Chinese imports (and other high emission countries)? Can Americans go green and reduce their $200 per person per month trade deficit by buying US made goods?
Several thoughtful answers. Lets see where the vote goes.

I think this question is somewhat backwards:  if CO2 emissions are priced into the cost of goods, American producers will have a competitive advantage over China and imports from China will be reduced.  China has a smaller economy than the USA despite greater CO2 emissions and 4 times the population.  This says something about efficiency and competitive advantage.

Whether trade is reduced is another question.  China could just as easily trade US bonds for goods as the reverse.  This might not fit with China’s policies, but the current policy isn’t in the interest of the USA or the world so it makes no sense to continue it.