Reduce CO2 Emissions - Conservation International (CI)
The United States and China are the top 2 emitters of greenhouse gas emissions due to industry, but Indonesia and Brazil are #3 and #4 due to the rampant destruction of forests in these countries. Conservation International works to stop deforestation and climate change, while protecting endangered species as well as the livelihoods of local communities.
Join Conservation International by essing your personal choices at home and helping us to make changes where it will do the most good. Learn more at http://www.Conservation.org/CarbonCalculator
Duration : 0:0:42
[youtube 2snnU3-k2CE]
i have a question: …
i have a question: several people state that humans cause 2% of total CO2 emmisions. yet scientinsts say human activites are causing global warming. so how can we cuse global warming if humans only cause 2% of the co2
Wooooo! save the …
x
Wooooo! save the world
you what would be …
you what would be the solution abolishing technology, then everything would be fine but since humanity is too selfish to do that, and since you’re soooooooooo worried about the CO2 emissions here’s an idea shut your mouth and stop ing breathing, also if CO2 is such a big factor in global warming don’t you think the world would have melted by now with ppl yacking on nonstop, also CO2 is natural and i think nuclear energy is affecting the climate a lot more than CO2
No reasonable …
No reasonable alternative source of energy is inexpensive. Wind is unreasonable and untested completely. People living near turbines are complaining of various illnesses - here we go again! Even if water was determined to be a source of energy, I’d probably hear that water is limited, am I correct?
uranium is also …
uranium is also limited, just as fossil fuels. Also, to enrich uranium costs a lot of fossil fuels, so I think it isn’t the good solution.
A quick question: …
A quick question: what is your stance on nuclear power?
Since links are …
Since links are spammed, I would suggest you go to the most popular search engine out there and type in climate audit as one word. This is one of the many sites I visit and they’ve done a great job of picking this theory to pieces. For instance, the hockey graph - wrong. The nice placement of thermometers on parking lots or at or near exhaust vents to inflate temps - pics included! I have more sites and countless articles so I’m quite confident you’ll learn a few things.
Well, back it up …
Well, back it up counter to my interests then. Quick, before refineries all go to weeds and the Hillary Rock-Bleaching Council is on the march….
Firsthand reports? …
Firsthand reports? Newsweek abstracts? Are we delving into deep science here? My partisan statements are done for a reason - this is a political issue. GW is also a religion. I’ve read up on this well enough to know that the pundits have changed from GW to climate change because the evidence isn’t on their side. Playing with the timelines to their advantage is just plain manipulative but honest scientists have shot this to pieces. I’ll back it up but you’re not interested, I know.
Sometimes I read or …
Sometimes I read or make more firsthand reports and evidence lines up much better than it would from conflicting Newsweek abstracts. Your close back there was partisan and declarative with no merit or aim, so your statements about Gore, who -is- an ad hoc legislator, sort of blow back on you.
Keep an eye on the roll of temperatures and fauna, and read actual working documents so lousy fixups do not land near you. A useful thing by you? Occasionally a common cause?
Al as legislator? …
Al as legislator? Try Svengali. His sole purpose would be power & money since losing the election. His gross failure with the ethanol vote and its worldwide impact are devastating. Surely you aren’t so naive to believe this hoax, rather you sound like someone who just adores nature - I for one am a nature lover. Maybe I’m wrong, I just find it hard to believe so many people can believe something that has nothing to back it up, especially temps. - the basis for which the theory is built.
My close is …
My close is truthful, although painful, I know. Your flowery language is pure poetry but does little to convince anyone your grasp of the material. Nature is far powerful than man and man is a gnat compared to it. Might I point you to the Bikini Atoll/nuclear testing and the recovery of the area since? There are a few in your camp that have good intentions but their so called solutions would kill economies & people - something your side seems to care so little about. Shocking but true.
Al strikes me as a …
Al strikes me as a legislator, directly the opposite of pretending to Promethean God of Nature (though he accepts some laurels if you really wanted to…).
If you’re going to address this as man Doctoring nature, rather than man not campaigning harm on nature, your position is better but your argument worse. Vignettes where we chose to do X to reforest (surely the published a plan and method? … Which we would then NOT try again?) are just that.
Your close is reprehensible.
And another perfect …
And another perfect example. After Saint Helens, there was an acre of land that “man” put a million or so into “bringing back” - well you can only guess the result. Nature healed itself. This whole co2/pollution is a load of turd. We’ve had more in the past and been just fine. All I can say is just stay out of the way because conservatives know how to take care of the world. You libs know how to screw things up.
Okay, Steve, the …
Okay, Steve, the number is 31,000, not 13,000 and I believe Al is a liar and cares more about power than anything. I’ll give you proof that nature is better than man at fixing itself. After Valdez spilled, man went up and tried to clean up - to this day if you look up there you can see the bleached stones where man tried to “fix” nature. Where man stopped and nature took over is perfect. How do you explain that?
You know, if you …
You know, if you cited a study people could choose to agree with you or not; 18M scientists who agree with Gore v. 13K who do not is a bit of a shrugoff. Do you think biodiversity just fixed itself, too; perhaps you helped raise 100,000 large novel (non-virtual) predators this year?
Nature contributes …
Nature contributes 97% of C02, man 3% to our atmosphere. You can call it whatever you want but you sound rather foolish calling a natural phenomena “a pollutant”. The IPCC can define anything it wants as a pollutant but it doesn’t make it so. 31,000 scientist disagree with Al - I don’t really care if a lot of kids & naive teachers agree with him. Some day you’ll come around.
I think more people …
I think more people believe Al gore than you. You sound stupid just by saying that CO2 isnt a pollutant. Looks like you have to go back to high school and retake your science courses!
You’ve obviously …
You’ve obviously been mislead by Al Gore. Do you even know what creates ozone? The sun is fully responsible for that and we used to think we could harm it with aerosols & freon. Forest fires were caused by people and because the underbrush has been mismanaged - enviro policy - it spread. Cyclones & hurricanes are driven by El Nino and La Nina. Read before you post. Don’t be lead by the nose (Al). You will sound very stupid.
Uh, who’s the ” …
Uh, who’s the “angry” one here. Al Gore and most Hollywood people use their cars and the internet a lot, too but they’re enviro’s. I hope you’re not. Anyone that implies we’re overdosing on co2 sounds & smells like and enviro to me. My words weren’t at all angry, just having a little debate here.
Where did u hear …
Where did u hear that? The increase in CO2 has cause all these recent natural disaters like the cyclone in China and forest fire in Malibu. CO2 is also depleating the ozone layer. Its true that its good for humans, plants and animals but its still a pollutant.
and to top it off …
and to top it off i’m not even an “enviro”, i drive a car around and spend hours on the internet. i also use styrofoam. so you can pretty much just take all your angry words and put them right back in your .
..no. i was …
..no. i was comparing the idea that too much of something is bad. freak out much?
What? Are you …
What? Are you trying to compare the human body to the earth? Are you serious? This is the problem with you enviro’s. You are too simple and don’t see how awesome the creation is. All you can do is trust idiot brainwashed Al Gore pukes and their “trustworthy” (cough, cough) models. Give me a break.
either is water to …
either is water to the human body- but if you get enough of it you’ll die.