[extropy-chat] Extinctions

Damien Sullivan phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu
Tue Jun 13 02:55:43 UTC 2006

On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 02:10:02PM -0700, KAZ wrote:

> > Governments don't need money for incentives; they can apply taxes.  If
> > oil burners had to pay for the cost of removing or sequestering their
> > CO2 then alternatives would probably look a lot more attractive.
> > Governments can create markets.
> But there /is/ no cost for removing CO2 from the atmosphere, because
> it tends to dissolve in water and be removed by blue-green algae. The
> higher the density of CO2 in the atmosphere, the faster this process
> occurs. 

And the more CO2 is in the water the slower the process, as the ocean
approaches saturation.  Chemistry, KAZ, chemistry.  In fact much of the
CO2 does go into the ocean, but not all of it, and it's the accumulation
which is alarming us.

> This is one of a thousand examples of why the whole global warming
> thing is nonsense. It's a balanced system, but not a /delicately/

Thousands of scientists who study this disagree with you.  Why do you
think you are smarter than they are?

-xx- Damien X-) 

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list