According to an article on Reuters, future farmers will have to raise livestock and plants that put out less methane and nitrous oxide, respectively, and send in greenhouse gas emission reports to the government (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/SP410451.htmFarmers face growing climate change dilemma-scientist 26 Mar 2009 10:54:46 GMT By David Fogarty, Climate Change Correspondent, Asia; Editing by Valerie Lee).
Efforts are being made in Australia to breed livestock that produce less methane and plants that produce less nitrous oxide, because methane "is about 20 times more powerful at warming the atmosphere than carbon dioxide" and nitrous oxide is "about 310 times more powerful than CO2" (ibid).
But what if the only emissions anyone had to contend with were those from agriculture because there were no emissions from vehicles, factories, or power plants? It's possible. Cf. www.campaignforgreen.com.
Showing posts with label power plants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label power plants. Show all posts
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Why Green Energy? . . . first in a series
Last summer, world leaders chose to focus on reducing carbon emissions to more than 80% for the G8 countries and encouraged developing countries to work toward 25-40% emissions below 1990 levels by the year 2020 (BBC News 2008/07/08 12:35 GMT).
On 12 December, European Union leaders discussed a 20% carbon emissions reduction by 2020, rather than the 25-40% scientists deem necessary (BBC News 1008/12/12).
The goals themselves reduced between July and December.
But carbon emissions don't. And neither do greenhouse gases.
In 2007, global carbon dioxide emissions increased by 3.1% (www.mnp.nl). Between 1970 and 2007, global greenhouse gases rose 75% (www.mnp.nl). In the United States alone, power plant greenhouse gas emissions had their "biggest single year increase" in 2007 (www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2008/2008-03-18-04.asp).
Why not raise the bar for higher reduction goals? And set the deadline sooner? But there's something much better: total elimination of carbon dioxide emissions and greenhouse gases.
It can be done. See www.campaignforgreen.com.
On 12 December, European Union leaders discussed a 20% carbon emissions reduction by 2020, rather than the 25-40% scientists deem necessary (BBC News 1008/12/12).
The goals themselves reduced between July and December.
But carbon emissions don't. And neither do greenhouse gases.
In 2007, global carbon dioxide emissions increased by 3.1% (www.mnp.nl). Between 1970 and 2007, global greenhouse gases rose 75% (www.mnp.nl). In the United States alone, power plant greenhouse gas emissions had their "biggest single year increase" in 2007 (www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2008/2008-03-18-04.asp).
Why not raise the bar for higher reduction goals? And set the deadline sooner? But there's something much better: total elimination of carbon dioxide emissions and greenhouse gases.
It can be done. See www.campaignforgreen.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)