Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:now account for the sinks (Score 1) 461

by Eunuchswear (#39992715) Attached to: NASA's Hansen Calls Out Obama On Climate Change

Good points, but US forests were likely growing for much of the past few centuries, because they were not in equilibrium.

I still don't get what you're trying to say. Your own figures show that the US forest coverage has declined by 2,000,000 Km2 since pre-industrial times. So the forest has been a net carbon source, not a sink.

These days, forests in the US are used extensively for making paper and wood (as opposed to heating), which does result in carbon capture.

No. Most of that paper and wood is either burned after use or goes into landfill, where bacterial decay turns it into methane, then eventualy to CO2.

The only way for a forest to be a sink is for it to grow (which is of course impossible in the long term), or for the wood to be cut and sequestered somewhere outside the carbon cycle, which is something we have never managed to do.

Comment: Re:now account for the sinks (Score 1) 461

by Eunuchswear (#39987343) Attached to: NASA's Hansen Calls Out Obama On Climate Change

And that doesn't even take into account carbon sinks. The US still is 30% forested and has 3,000,000 km2 of forests, down from about 5,000,000 km2 preindustrial, busily capturing CO2. For most of its history, the US was almost certainly a net carbon sink, with the switchover probably occurring sometime in the second half of the 20th century.

Wrong. Forests are not a carbon sink, they are a carbon store.

To be a carbon sink forests have to be expanding.

As you point out the US has lost about 2,000,000 km2 of forest - most of that carbon has gone into the atmosphere.

Comment: Re:Nuclear (Score 1) 461

by Eunuchswear (#39987079) Attached to: NASA's Hansen Calls Out Obama On Climate Change

It takes 15 Terawatts to power the world and each fission reactor apparently provides about 1 gigawatt, so to furnish 50% of the world's energy needs of today with nuclear, we'd need to build 1 billion nuclear fission reactors.

What?

We need 1.5 x 10^13 W
One reactor can give us 10^9 W

So we need 1.5 x 10^4 reactors to meet all current engergy needs, thats 15,000 not a billion.

Comment: Re:Greenies have won while the majority in Japan l (Score 1) 452

by Eunuchswear (#39939261) Attached to: Japan's Last Nuclear Reactor Shuts Down

Sorry, it was Solar Trust that got the 2.1 billion loan and the closed their doors. Wrong solar company.

RU Sure?

http://solartrustofamerica.com/

Contrary to inaccurate media reports, no taxpayer funds were loaned to Solar Trust of America. The company withdrew from the Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program in August 2011 foregoing any government funding for the Blythe Solar Power Project.

Comment: Re:Dating students? (Score 0) 190

Crap, at my high school, as I later found out (it wasn't common knowledge at the time), three of the four P.E. teachers had married students, and that a fifth, who had moved to middle school but who had been part of the faculty at the time had also married a student.

You went to the same school as Newt Gingrich?

Baker's First Law of Federal Geometry: A block grant is a solid mass of money surrounded on all sides by governors.

Working...